Articles

The Ontario Superior Court of Justice recently dismissed a claim for spoliation of evidence resulting from the efforts of an employee of the defendant company to delete the browsing history on his computer before turning it over in compliance with a court order. Although the Court accepted that the employee did not intentionally destroy evidence relevant to the case, the decision is a reminder of the boundaries of employee expectations of privacy.

The decision in Lozanski v The Home Depot, Inc. by the Ontario Superior Court of Justice is one of the few court-approved privacy breach class action settlements in Canada. The decision provides some much needed guidance in this area: the Court suggests that actual harm is needed for class members to receive financial compensation and that companies should adopt a proactive approach to mitigate liability when faced with a privacy breach.

In a recent decision, the Divisional Court set aside an order of the IPC mandating that certain confidential information of the applicant union was to be disclosed to a representative of a rival union. The Court held that the applicants need not show that harm had actually occurred, but that the context of the disclosure request was enough to demonstrate a reasonable risk of harm.

This article discusses whether condo corporations should disclose to condo owners the email addresses of their owners.

This article discusses why, in the author's view, PIPEDA does not apply to condominium corporations.

This article explores the recent enforcement action in connection with Canada's anti-spam law ("CASL") - this time led by the Office of the Privacy Commissioner.

Douglas New discusses how access to information requests can be used in a national security review process under the Investment Canada Act.

This article explores the recent examination by the Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada of internet-connected/wireless health devices that collect data on individuals and whether they are compliant with PIPEDA requirements.

Summary of a recent case where the Ontario Superior Court ordered a man to compensate his ex-girlfriend after he posted an explicit video of her online without her consent.