December 16, 2021
We updated this publication on January 12, 2024.
The name of the game is to have a plan to mitigate the risk that a data breach will happen – but be ready when it does. According to the August 2023 Canadian Internet Registration Authority (CIRA) Cybersecurity Survey, of the organizations surveyed about the prior 12 months: 41% experienced an attempted or successful cyber attack in the prior 12 months; 22% experienced a successful ransomware attack and of those, 71% indicated data was exfiltrated; and 40% experienced a breach of customer and/or employee data. And while the cyber security risks inherent in remote and hybrid work arrangements still exist, concerns about the cyber security risks generative AI poses seems to have surpassed those about remote workers. According to CIRA’s 2023 Survey, 68% of organizations worried about potential cyber threats from generative AI. When a data breach does happen, your organization will face exposure on several fronts – including legal claims by those whose privacy rights were affected by the breach. Here’s a look at who sues after a data breach, the privacy breach class action trend, and a rundown of the key legal claims for privacy breaches that can be made in Canada.
Civil Lawsuit Exposure
When a data breach occurs, there are several sources of exposure your organization will be staring down: statutory penalties, against both the organization and potentially its directors personally, for breach of relevant privacy laws like the Digital Privacy Act (and in the future, much higher penalties under the proposed Consumer Privacy Protection Act, the anticipated replacement of Canada’s general privacy statute, PIPEDA); a (typically public) privacy commissioner investigation, and the related organizational and legal time and costs; negative publicity and reputational damage; the costs of being unable to carry on business, and potentially closing; and, of course, the inevitable privacy breach civil lawsuits that now seem to follow every significant data breach:
The Data Breach Class Action Trend
Privacy breach lawsuits are already common in the U.S. and are increasingly common in Canada. The latest trend: data breach class action lawsuits, of which there are over 80 pending in Canada. And most lawsuits don’t just allege a single legal wrong; they allege multiple wrongs for the same privacy breach, many of which can overlap and interlock, primarily because the legal requirements for each is different. This approach is particularly so in privacy or data breach class actions, when actually continuing to a full trial is rare and the allegedly injured parties seek to certify as many bases for their claim to increase their leverage to negotiate a settlement. And settlement is often the outcome. So far, only one Canadian class action lawsuit has been decided on its merits by a court: in March 2021, the Quebec Superior Court dismissed a privacy breach class action in Lamoureux v. Investment Industry Regulatory Organization of Canada (IIROC). This decision is based on the Quebec Civil Code, so only applies in the province of Quebec, but the court’s positive assessment of the defendant’s conduct in response to the breach is instructive to all organizations, regardless of location.
Courts must approve class action lawsuit settlements, and these approvals are usually published. Therefore, we know that generally, the per capita general damages awarded are often “miniscule”, to use the words of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice from the 2021 decision approving the settlement of the data breach class action lawsuit in Karasik v. Yahoo!. But the total settlement generally isn’t: for instance, it cost the defendant in the Yahoo! case approximately $20.3M – plus the organizational and legal time and costs, the negative publicity and reputational damage, and business disruption the defendant experienced as a result of the breach and the class action lawsuit. And since none have yet proceeded to a full trial, the damages a court would award remain to be seen. We also know that plaintiffs face some big obstacles in proving they suffered compensable damage in a privacy breach claim (class action or not). These obstacles could increasingly be a barrier to even getting a class action certified in Canada, as, for example, in the Alberta Court of Appeal’s 2023 decision in Setoguchi v. Uber B.V. dismissing a certification application for a privacy breach class action. But plaintiffs and their counsel continue to test the privacy breach class action waters, with decisions beginning to emerge delineating the scope of liability for privacy breaches.
6 Key Legal Privacy Breach Claims
The law around civil claims for privacy and data breaches has been incrementally developing over time. But the COVID-19 pandemic is increasing data breach attempts and successes, which will likely accelerate the development of the law in this space. Here’s a rundown of six key legal claims that, to date, we’re seeing made against a party for breaching another’s privacy rights in Canada.
1. Intrusion Upon Seclusion
In 2012, the Ontario Court of Appeal officially recognized a new civil claim for invasion of privacy in Canada: “intrusion upon seclusion”. In the case that kicked off the privacy lawsuit explosion in Canada, Jones v. Tsige, the employee consistently and repeatedly snooped into a single co-worker’s records. The decision confirmed that to establish that the defendant is liable for intrusion upon seclusion, the plaintiff must prove the defendant:
The plaintiff doesn’t have to prove they suffered a financial loss, but courts have said that any award in a case without a direct financial loss should be modest, though still enough to recognize the wrong done. In the Jones case, the Court decided a range up to $20,000.00 (about $23,000 in 2021) is appropriate for intrusion upon seclusion that didn’t entail financial loss, and summarized the factors relevant to determining where in that range of damages a particular case would fall:
In Jones, the Court decided the defendant employee did commit intrusion upon seclusion by repeatedly viewing her co-worker’s bank record, and ordered she pay the plaintiff employee $10,000.00 (about $11,500 in 2021).
Until recently, an outstanding question was whether the “reckless” requirement means an organization that didn’t properly handle or safeguard information it held could be liable for intrusion upon seclusion where a third party hacked into that information. But in a trilogy of November 2022 cases (Owsianik v. Equifax Canada Co., Winder v. Marriott International Inc. and Obodo v. Trans Union of Canada), the Ontario Court of Appeal answered this question with a “no”: only the party that actually does the intruding can be liable for intrusion upon seclusion. However, the organization that was hacked is still exposed to liability on some other basis, like negligence or breach of contract – but those claims require the plaintiff to prove they suffered a pecuniary loss, which in many such cases, will be a hurdle the plaintiff can’t overcome (though the breach of confidence claim, which courts are still scrutinizing, doesn’t require proof of damages). And while these decisions are only binding in Ontario, they will be persuasive in other Canadian jurisdictions.
2. Publicity to Private Life (aka Public Disclosure of Private Facts)
In January 2016, the Ontario Superior Court of Justice dramatically expanded the liability exposure for breach of privacy when it recognized a legal claim for “publicity to private life”, also known as “public disclosure of private facts”. The case, Doe 464533 v. D., wasn’t a business case; it involved “revenge porn”. But the claim could equally apply to data breaches by businesses that are the custodians of sensitive personal information, particularly if they hold it “in confidence” – which implicitly includes any information the business holds under the Personal Information and Electronic Documents Act (PIPEDA) (or it’s possible successor, the Consumer Privacy Protection Act). To succeed in a claim for public disclosure of private facts, the plaintiff must prove:
Some U.S. courts, where this claim has been in existence longer, also require that the plaintiff prove the absence of any waiver or privilege. However, it’s not yet clear whether this is a requirement in Canada.
Since Canadian courts have only recently recognized this type of privacy breach claim, its full parameters haven’t yet been fully developed in Canadian law. However, the thrust of the decisions so far seems to be that it’s the actual wrong-doer (for example, the hacker) that would be liable (if at all) for the public disclosure of private facts, not the organization that was the original custodian of the information (that is, the hacked organization). For example, in Kaplan v. Casino Rama, a 2019 cyber-extortion case, the claimants sued the subject of the cyber-extortion for intrusion upon seclusion, publicity to private life, negligence, breach of confidence and breach of contract. The Ontario Superior Court of Justice (noting there wasn’t yet any appeal court decision confirming publicity to private life is, indeed, a valid claim in Ontario) excluded the claim of publicity to private life because the business that was the subject of cyber-extortion wasn’t the entity that might have actually made the information public. In another 2016 case, Canada v. John Doe, the Federal Court of Appeal struck the claim for publicity to private life from a privacy class action on the basis the facts set out in the claim didn’t meet the wide publicity criteria. In comparison, in the Doe 464533 case, the defendant posted an intimate video of the plaintiff on a publicly accessible website.
3. Negligence
Parties have relied on negligence to address privacy claims, particularly where alleged carelessness or lax security has resulted in unauthorized disclosures of personal information. For example, the Federal Court of Appeal certified a class action against the government of Canada based on (among other claims) negligence for the disclosure of personal health information in its 2015 decision in Condon v. Canada. Similarly, the Federal Court certified a class action against the government of Canda based on (among other things) “systemic” negligence for two data breaches in its 2022 decision in Sweet v. Canada. To succeed in a negligence claim, the plaintiff must prove:
The existence of the regulatory statutes can serve to establish both the duty of care and the standard of care for protecting personal information from misuse. The advantage to a plaintiff to sue for negligence in a privacy breach lawsuit is that courts are familiar with it: they understand it and accept it. A disadvantage to plaintiffs compared to the other privacy breach claims is that the plaintiff must prove it suffered damages, which could be too onerous in many situations. For example, in many large data security or privacy breaches, the plaintiff claims they suffered an increased risk of harm related to identity theft or fraud, or fear of it happening and, in part, the cost of measures taken to mitigate harm (for example, credit monitoring, changing payment cards, and so on). Courts have, however, generally shrugged this off as just part of ordinary life and the claim fails for lack of compensable harm. But if the plaintiff can show real, tangible harm, then negligence is a viable foundation for a privacy claim.
4. Breach of Confidence
Breach of confidence is the “one to watch” when it comes to lawsuits for privacy breaches. One advantage for a plaintiff – and detriment to a defendant – of a breach of confidence claim is that it’s an “equitable” claim: courts have great latitude to fashion appropriate remedies, including non-monetary damages like ordering a defendant to do (or not to do) certain things, removing from a defendant the profit it gained from lax security practices that led to the breach of confidence, or ordering aggregate damages to a class of plaintiffs. In some countries, such as Australia, breach of confidence is one of the main types of privacy breach claims. But in Canada, while breach of confidence is a common claim in trade secret litigation and privacy breach class action lawsuits often include it, there aren’t yet any Canadian court decisions on its merits in a privacy context. However, it seems the plaintiff must prove:
One unresolved question is whether the plaintiff must also prove the misuse was detrimental to them. A second unresolved question is whether “misuse” is possible without the wrong-doer’s intention. On this, courts have gone both ways. in each of the 2015 Condon v. Canada and the 2016 John Doe v. Canada cases, the Federal Court of Appeal certified a class action against the government of Canada based on a claim for breach of confidence for the disclosure of personal information. In contrast, its 2019 decision in Kaplan v. Casino Rama, the Ontario Superior Court of Justice refused to permit the breach of confidence claim to go forward in a cyber-extortion case, deciding the defendant’s failure to prevent the cyber-attack wasn’t “misuse” of disclosed information. Similarly, in its 2020 decision in Tucci v. Peoples Trust Company, the British Columbia Court of Appeal refused to certify a class action claim for breach of confidence because the “misuse” of the information must be intentional, not “inadvertent”. In its 2022 decision in Sweet v. Canada, the Federal Court acknowledged the divided case law on this issue of “misuse” but chose to follow the Federal Court of Appeal and certified a class action claim for breach of confidence.
5. Breach of Contract
If the party claiming another has breached its privacy, and there’s a contract between the parties, the privacy breach might support a claim for a breach of contract, especially if the contract includes any commitment to secure personal information. The plaintiff must prove:
The advantage of a breach of contract claim for plaintiffs is that, like negligence, courts are familiar with them. An example in which a breach of contract claim was included in a privacy lawsuit certified as a class action is the 2019 Ontario Superior Court decision in Agnew-Americano v. Equifax Canada. But not every privacy violation involves a contract between parties – and not every contract includes privacy-related provisions that can be the subject of a breach claim. That said, however, a breach of contract claim can be based on a privacy policy if a court decides that policy amounts to a standalone contract or is incorporated into a company’s more general service-related agreement.
6. Statutory Lawsuit for Breach of Privacy
Five Canadian provinces have created a statutory lawsuit for invasion of privacy: British Columbia, Manitoba, Saskatchewan, Newfoundland and Labrador, and Quebec. In each, the language is relatively broad, and they parallel each other. The British Columbia statute allows a person to make a claim, without requiring proof of loss, against a person who willfully and without right violates their privacy. Other provinces have similar language, but also provide examples of what could be a privacy violation. The Newfoundland and Labrador and Quebec statutes, for instance, call out the use of personal documents without consent.
British Columbia courts, such as the B.C. Supreme Court in Tucci v. People’s Trust Company, have consistently decided the existence of the B.C. Privacy Act effectively ousts the common law claims of breach of privacy and intrusion upon seclusion. While the British Columbia Court of Appeal, in the same case, commented that given the critical role of data in people’s lives, the Court may want to reconsider this position, the plaintiffs didn’t appeal the decision on this issue so the Appeal Court didn’t address it.
The Consumer Privacy Protection Act (CPPA), which is currently under Committee review in Parliament, is expected to create a new privacy breach legal claim. Under the CPPA, an individual would be able to sue an organization (within two years) for a data breach where the federal Privacy Commissioner decides that organization violated an individual’s privacy under the Act, if the Personal Information and Data Protection Tribunal upholds that finding. An individual can bring their claim in both the federal and provincial courts, leading to a multiplicity of duplicate proceedings across the country. And this is on top of the significant new fines for breaching the CPPA.
Please contact your McInnes Cooper lawyer or any member of our Privacy, Data Protection & Cyber Security Team @ McInnes Cooper to discuss how we can help you deal with the legal risks of data breaches.
McInnes Cooper has prepared this document for information only; it is not intended to be legal advice. You should consult McInnes Cooper about your unique circumstances before acting on this information. McInnes Cooper excludes all liability for anything contained in this document and any use you make of it.
© McInnes Cooper, 2021. All rights reserved. McInnes Cooper owns the copyright in this document. You may reproduce and distribute this document in its entirety as long as you do not alter the form or the content and you give McInnes Cooper credit for it. You must obtain McInnes Cooper’s consent for any other form of reproduction or distribution. Email us at [email protected] to request our consent.
Aug 15, 2024
On June 21, 2024, the Supreme Court of Canada concluded – decisively - that the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms applies to protect the…
Jul 16, 2024
The Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS) has been looking for a new production order power; it’s on its way. The role of CSIS is to…
Jun 26, 2024
An increasing number of municipalities in Canada are using public video camera surveillance to promote public safety and help deter crimes like…
Jun 20, 2024
On April 30, 2024, the Ontario Divisional Court decided the victim of a serious cyber security incident was required to produce to privacy…
Apr 30, 2024
Bill C-63, if passed, will create the hotly anticipated Online Harms Act to regulate certain online platforms, create new Criminal Code of…
Mar 14, 2024
On March 1, 2024, the Supreme Court of Canada decided a police request for disclosure of an IP address is a “search” under section 8 of the…
Mar 1, 2024
Updated April 17, 2024. By May 31, 2024 (or possibly earlier for federally incorporated Reporting Entities), Reporting Entities under the…
Dec 15, 2023
Over four years after it began, the federal government still hasn’t finalized its overhaul of the private sector privacy law regime that both…
Sep 25, 2023
There’s a new scam on the web: Electronic Fund Transfer (EFT) scams. Most are familiar with established scams like phishing and ransomware and…
Aug 10, 2023
Canada’s first Tech Talent Strategy aims to aggressively attract tech talent to “fuel innovation and drive emerging technologies forward”.…
Jun 21, 2023
Updated April 17, 2024. On January 1, 2024 the federal Fighting Against Forced Labour and Child Labour in Supply Chains Act (Bill S-211)…
Jun 9, 2023
You arrive at the legendary Madison Square Garden to catch the Mariah Carey concert. It’s the big event of the trip – the reason you came to…
Apr 27, 2023
The benefits to employees, and often to employers, of remote work has made it a staple of today’s workplace. But the move to remote work…
Feb 1, 2023
On January 26, 2023, the Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada (OPC) released a report of findings requiring companies using targeted…
Jan 26, 2023
In November 2022, the Ontario Court of Appeal definitively decided an organization whose information systems are breached by a malicious third…
Jan 16, 2023
2022 is in the rearview mirror, but the past year left lasting implications for employers. Here’s a retrospective on five of the key 2022…
Dec 6, 2022
On September 22, 2022, the N.L. Supreme Court confirmed the Nunatsiavut Assembly is a legislative body that holds all privileges, immunities,…
Dec 1, 2022
Updated September 5, 2024. The COVID-19 pandemic drove remote work to unprecedented heights. Employee calls for greater flexibility, and cost…
Nov 21, 2022
On November 10, 2022, the Supreme Court of Canada examined the interaction of arbitration and bankruptcy and insolvency proceedings, deciding a…
Jul 20, 2022
There’s a new privacy law coming to Canada. In June, the federal government introduced a complete overhaul of the privacy law regime that both…
Jul 18, 2022
The Supreme Court of Canada’s “Jordan” framework, introducing strict timelines for determining unreasonable delay in the context of…
Jun 30, 2022
On June 16, 2022, the federal government took a second shot at a complete overhaul of the private sector privacy law regime that both protects…
May 20, 2022
On May 22, 2010 (affectionately known as “Bitcoin Pizza Day”), a Floridian bought two Papa John's pizzas with Bitcoin. The day is famous…
Mar 31, 2022
On March 18, 2022, the Supreme Court of Canada confirmed that an Indigenous government can still satisfy the impecuniosity requirement for an…
Feb 8, 2022
Updated June 17, 2024. On May 17, 2022, the P.E.I. Non-disclosure Agreements Act took effect, significantly restricting the use of…
Feb 3, 2022
On January 26, 2022, the British Columbia Court of Appeal extended an injunction preventing protesters from interfering with a logging…
Jan 25, 2022
More and more people are using smart contracts: the global smart contracts market was valued at USD $145M in 2020; it’s projected to be valued…
Nov 12, 2021
On November 4, 2021, the Supreme Court of Canada clarified the law regarding when a judgment debtor “carries on business” for the purpose of…
Aug 3, 2021
On July 29, 2021, the Supreme Court of Canada refined the test for determining when a plaintiff has discovered a claim for the purpose of a…
Jul 21, 2021
Updated February 9, 2024. It’s now widely accepted: it’s imperative that workplaces be both diverse and inclusive. Perhaps the most oft…
Mar 1, 2021
The Supreme Court of Canada continues to develop and clarify the organizing principle of good faith performance in contract law. In its 2014…
Jan 26, 2021
Updated March 4, 2022. Privacy is critical to every business in every sector, including startups and growing businesses: to comply with the…
Jan 18, 2021
The Supreme Court of Canada, in the 2014 case of Bhasin v. Hrynew, recognized a general organizing principle of good faith performance in…
Dec 2, 2020
Using social media influencers and micro-influencers is an increasingly effective marketing strategy. Social media use is pervasive; 94% of…
Nov 19, 2020
We updated this publication on June 30, 2022. NOTE: On June 16, 2022, the Government of Canada introduced Bill C-27: Digital Charter…
Nov 17, 2020
We updated this publication on July 11, 2023. Spurred by the COVID-19 Pandemic and bricks-and-mortar closures, businesses – from SMEs to…
Aug 12, 2020
This publication has been updated as of May 5, 2021. The ongoing COVID-19 pandemic has led many employees to continue working from home, by…
Jul 6, 2020
On June 26, 2020, the Supreme Court of Canada released Uber Technologies Inc. v. Heller, a much-awaited decision regarding the enforceability of…
Jun 12, 2020
The financial technology (Fintech) industry uses technology to support and enhance financial and banking services.
May 11, 2020
The Supreme Court of Canada recently released a much-awaited decision regarding the Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act (CCAA). The CCAA is…
Mar 10, 2020
The global COVID-19 (a.k.a. Coronavirus or SARS-CoV-2) outbreak has implications for many commercial relationships, its evolving nature and…
Feb 14, 2020
NOTE: On July 23, 2021, the Supreme Court of Canada agreed with the Newfoundland & Labrador Court of Appeal’s decision respecting the law,…
Jan 14, 2020
On December 23, 2019, the Newfoundland and Labrador Court of Appeal effectively eliminated the category of “knowledgeable fact witness” in…
Nov 18, 2019
Effective December 1, 2019, the New Brunswick government will finally finalize the reform of N.B.’s money judgment enforcement regime with the…
Mar 28, 2019
Organizations subject to Canada’s Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act (PIPEDA) – those that collect, use or…
Feb 20, 2019
On February 14, 2019, the Supreme Court of Canada decided yet another criminal law decision that will likely have broader ramifications for…
Dec 19, 2018
On December 13, 2018, the Supreme Court of Canada confirmed that a third party can’t waive a person’s right to privacy or their rights under…
Aug 20, 2018
Updated July 8, 2024. Every organization subject to Canada’s Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act (PIPEDA, soon to…
Aug 3, 2018
Updated June 28, 2024. As of November 1, 2018, organizations in Canada subject to the Personal Information Protection and Electronic…
Jul 18, 2018
Most businesses – from startups to SMEs to multi-nationals, and from private family-owned businesses to public corporations – will use…
Jun 13, 2018
Updated September 26, 2024. Businesspeople (and their legal counsel) are on the road more than ever before: according to Statistics Canada,…
Apr 2, 2018
Equity compensation plans are a valuable and versatile tool for many corporations, from early-stage startups to established blue-chips.…
Jan 12, 2018
Whether a provincial court will grant police a “production order” under the Criminal Code of Canada requiring a non-Canadian company to…
Nov 16, 2017
Corporations are the leading business vehicle in modern commerce. For startups, properly structuring and incorporating is critical to avoid…
Oct 31, 2017
Intellectual Property (IP) can be a valuable asset – even the most valuable asset – of a business. So it’s worth making sure the business…
Jul 28, 2017
Updated June 10, 2022. The rapid rise in ESG (Environment, Social and Governance) principles has increased focus on workplace diversity and…
Jul 17, 2017
A corporation does not always sail in calm or safe waters. Cash shortages, unattainable or unmet goals, Board disagreements over the best course…
Jul 13, 2017
When growing your business, you face many decisions, including choosing the business structure that is right for you. Your legal team can be…
Jun 28, 2017
On June 28, 2017, the Supreme Court of Canada confirmed a Canadian court can issue an interlocutory injunction (an order requiring an entity or…
Jun 23, 2017
On June 23, 2017, the Supreme Court of Canada decided that in a contest between the choice of forum clause in Facebook’s online terms of use…
Jun 7, 2017
On June 7, 2017, the federal government repealed the regulations that would have brought into effect the sections of Canada’s Anti Spam…
Jun 5, 2017
On June 2, 2017, the Supreme Court of Canada decided that where a plaintiff advances a claim for negligently caused psychological or psychiatric…
Mar 30, 2017
Social media platforms, like Instagram, Twitter, LinkedIn, YouTube, Facebook and GooglePlus, arguably have more followers and are more closely…
Feb 24, 2017
Updated January 29, 2024. Most organizations (72%) store the personal information of customers. employees, suppliers, vendors or partners,…
Jan 25, 2017
Doing business with the public sector creates an often overlooked – but very real – risk that the confidential information a business…
Dec 7, 2016
Updated February 7, 2024. We live in a world of change. New ideas and new industries are rapidly developing and the list keeps growing: tidal…
Nov 22, 2016
On November 17, 2016 the Supreme Court of Canada decided a mortgagee has the mortgagor’s implied consent to disclose its discharge statement…
Oct 19, 2016
We updated this publication on January 17, 2023. For many businesses, large and small, their “Intellectual Property” (IP) is one of their…
Oct 19, 2016
Business owners wear many hats – including employer. Your employees may be your business’s greatest asset, but they could also be your…
Aug 17, 2016
The Newfoundland and Labrador Court of Appeal recently affirmed the test for confirming a cause of action and thus resetting a limitation period…
May 10, 2016
This publication has been updated as at April 18, 2022. Access to sufficient capital is always a business issue, from the startup stage right…
Mar 24, 2016
When a business responds to a public sector Request for Proposal or Expression of Interest (both of which we’ll refer to as an RFP for these…
Jan 27, 2016
On January 21, 2016, the Ontario Superior Court of Justice dramatically expanded the scope of legal privacy protection – and the liability…
Mar 31, 2015
Updated June 24, 2021. Women make up close to half of the employed workforce: in 2019, Canadian women 15 years and older represented 47.4% of…
Mar 25, 2015
On March 3, 2015 Canada’s Privacy Commissioner determined that Health Canada breached privacy laws by mailing letters to over 40,000 Marihuana…
Mar 6, 2015
On March 5, 2015, the Canadian Radio and Television Commission (the CRTC, the main agency charged with administering and enforcing most of CASL)…
Dec 11, 2014
On December 11, 2014 the Supreme Court of Canada continued its trend to recognize privacy rights – and develop the law to protect them –…
Dec 11, 2014
On January 15, 2015, the software provisions of Canada’s Anti-Spam Legislation (CASL) will take effect. CASL’s anti-spam sections, touted…
Dec 1, 2014
The construction industry - project owners, contractors, subcontractors and trades - might be relaxing, ignoring the hype around Canada’s…
Nov 14, 2014
On November 13, 2014, the Supreme Court of Canada (SCC) effected a significant development in Canadian contract law by recognizing the…
Oct 14, 2014
CASL’s anti-spam sections came into force on July 1, 2014. Every organization that CASL affects should now be complying with it – and their…
Aug 1, 2014
Most Canadians have heard about Canada’s Anti-Spam Legislation (CASL): we’ve been bombarded with “CASL Compliant” emails asking us to…
Jun 16, 2014
On June 13, 2014 the Supreme Court of Canada decided that Canadians have a reasonable expectation of privacy in their online activities, and…
Jun 12, 2014
The countdown to CASL is almost over: there are only 13 business days until the anti-spam provisions of CASL – and most of the penalties for…
May 8, 2014
On July 1, 2014 – less than two months from now - the anti-spam sections of Canada’s Anti-Spam Legislation (CASL) take effect. Individuals…
Apr 15, 2014
The countdown to CASL is on: on July 1, 2014, the anti-spam sections of Canada’s Anti-Spam Legislation (“CASL”) take effect. Individuals…
Feb 28, 2014
On July 1, 2014, the anti-spam sections of Canada’s Anti-Spam Legislation (aka “CASL”) will take effect. CASL is: Broad. It applies…
Feb 28, 2014
On July 1, 2014, the anti-spam sections of Canada’s Anti-Spam Legislation (aka “CASL”) take effect. CASL will apply to just about every…
Nov 8, 2013
On November 7, 2013, the Supreme Court of Canda decided police require specific authorization in a search warrant to search the data in a…
Nov 28, 2012
On October 19, 2012 the Supreme Court of Canada (SCC) decided a teacher criminally charged with possession of child pornography and unauthorized…
Subscribe to McInnes Cooper to stay current with our leading insights on legal updates, trends, news, events, and services.