November 28, 2016
On November 25, 2016, the Supreme Court of Canada decided privilege wins again – twice. In two separate decisions – Lizotte v. Aviva Insurance Company of Canada and Alberta (Information and Privacy Commissioner) v. University of Calgary – the Court declared first litigation privilege, then solicitor-client privilege, the winner over competing statutory disclosure obligations. While the Court reconfirms solicitor‑client and litigation privilege are distinct and distinguishable from one another (and provides a useful summary of their similarities and differences at paragraph 22 of Lizotte v. Aviva Insurance Company of Canada), it also confirms both privileges are equally fundamental to the proper functioning of the Canadian legal system – and demonstrate the heights to which the Court will go to protect both in the face of statutory disclosure obligations.
The decisions may have the greatest practical impact on regulatory bodies and their ability to access information in the course of their regulatory investigations:
Litigation and regulatory investigations often go hand-in-hand. Regulators (securities regulators, medical and health regulators, legal and accounting profession regulators, and so on) often seek access to all information relevant to their investigation, including records that have been created to assist with ongoing or anticipated litigation. Following the Court’s decision in Lizotte v. Aviva Insurance Company of Canada, it’s clear that litigation privilege will prevail over a statutory disclosure obligation unless the statute empowering the regulator specifically overrides litigation privilege. General statements in statutes entitling regulators to “all documents” will no longer cut it. As a result, regulators may have to make a decision: proceed without those documents, or wait until the litigation is finished. Neither is particularly appealing.
The bar to beat a privilege claim has always been high. In recent years, the Supreme Court has raised that bar. In the case of solicitor-client privilege, it’s now been raised past a “legal privilege” to a “substantive right” (but stopped short of elevating it to quasi-constitutional status). The Court’s decision in Alberta (Information and Privacy Commissioner) v. University of Calgary that the words “privilege of the law of evidence” isn’t enough to clear the bar suggests nothing short of an express statutory requirement to disclose “solicitor-client privileged” records will permit a regulator or investigator to review those records.
Even if the regulator gets it, caution is still required. The Court was also clear that even if a regulator or investigator may review privileged documents, it must exercise this power must sparingly in a manner that infringes the substantive right as little as possible.
LITIGATION PRIVILEGE BEATS STATUTORY DISCLOSURE OBLIGATION
In Lizotte v. Aviva Insurance Company of Canada, Ms. Lizotte is a representative of Quebec’s insurance regulator. In the course of an inquiry, Ms. Lizotte asked Aviva Insurance Company of Canada to produce its complete claim file, stating the investigation could not be completed otherwise. Aviva refused on the basis that some documents were protected by litigation privilege. The regulator filed a motion for full production, arguing the statutory obligation under Quebec’s Act Respecting the Distribution of Financial Products and Services that requires Aviva to produce “any…document” abrogated litigation privilege. The Quebec Superior Court, the Quebec Court of Appeal and ultimately the Supreme Court of Canada dismissed the regulator’s motion:
Class, not case-by-case, privilege. The Court dismissed the regulator’s argument that litigation privilege exists to facilitate the litigation process and is therefore a case-by-case privilege. The Court confirmed litigation privilege does exist to facilitate a process, but it is still a class privilege and like all class privileges (such as settlement privilege and informer privilege), once the conditions for its application are met, there is a presumption of non-disclosure.
Exceptions, not balancing. The Court also dismissed the regulator’s argument that litigation privilege must be subjected to a balancing test, and courts must assess the harm resulting from upholding the privilege against the opposing interests. The Court decided this would be akin to finding litigation privilege is a case-by-case privilege (which it already rejected) and would undermine the confidence of those the privilege protects. Appropriate, specific exceptions to litigation privilege need to be identified. The exceptions to solicitor-client privilege also apply to litigation privilege; abuse of process or similar blameworthy conduct is also an exception. Other exceptions may be identified in the future but will “always be based on narrow classes that apply in specific circumstances” and without creating such an exception, the Court stated one “based on urgency and necessity” is appealing.
Applies to anyone, not just parties. Finally, the Court rejected the argument that Aviva shouldn’t be permitted to assert litigation privilege against a party not involved in the litigation – particularly a regulator with legislative investigative powers, confidentiality obligations and limits to further disclosure. This argument was based on the regulator’s earlier position that litigation privilege exists to facilitate the adversarial process, so only those involved should be affected. The Court found the argument “unconvincing” based on the risk of disclosure by the third parties, unintended waiver and the risks to effective preparation for litigation. It confirmed litigation privilege can be asserted against “anyone, including administrative or criminal investigators”. The Court also confirmed the presumption that a legislature doesn’t intend to change fundamental common law rules, such as those relating to litigation privilege, without clear and explicit provisions (absent in this legislation).
SOLICITOR-CLIENT PRIVILEGE BEATS FREEDOM OF INFORMATION LEGISLATION
In Alberta (Information and Privacy Commissioner) v. University of Calgary, a former employee sued the University of Calgary for constructive dismissal. The University claimed solicitor-client privilege over certain records. The employee made an access to information request for the records. Alberta’s Information and Privacy Commissioner ordered the University to produce them per the Commission’s “Solicitor‑Client Privilege Adjudication Protocol” requiring the provision of a copy of the disputed records or two copies of an affidavit or unsworn evidence verifying privilege over them to substantiate the privilege claim. In keeping with civil litigation law and practice at the time, the University provided a list of documents and a sworn affidavit indicating the claim of solicitor‑client privilege. The Commissioner sought further verification and ultimately issued a Notice to Produce Records under Alberta’s Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act’s (FOIPP) section 56(3) requiring a public body to produce required records to the Commissioner “[d]espite . . . any privilege of the law of evidence”. The University applied to the court for judicial review of the Commissioner’s decision to issue the Notice on the basis section 56(3)’s wording does not include solicitor-client privilege. The lower court agreed with the Commissioner’s Office. However, the Court of Appeal decided “any privilege of the law of evidence” in section 56(3) doesn’t include solicitor‑client privilege and the Supreme Court of Canada agreed:
Words aren’t enough to override privilege here. Solicitor‑client privilege is a substantive right fundamental to the Canadian legal system. Statutory language that purports to overcome or impinge on it must be restrictively interpreted and “demonstrate a clear and unambiguous legislative intent to do so”. The wording “any privilege of the law of evidence” doesn’t meet this test.
Production isn’t appropriate here in any event. Even if the wording did meet the test, this isn’t an appropriate case in which to order production: the Protocol is not law but a guide to assist adjudicators and public bodies. The University also complied with the permitted approach and there was no evidence or argument it made a false claim, and no need for the Commission to review the records to decide.
Please contact your McInnes Cooper lawyer or any member of the Privacy Law Team @ McInnes Cooper to discuss this topic or any other legal issue.
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, 2016. 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.
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…
Sep 18, 2023
In its August 23, 2023 decision in Peterson v. College of Psychologists of Ontario, the Ontario Superior Court of Justice canvassed the limits…
Jun 12, 2023
The Nova Scotia Supreme Court has added a new, lower range for general damages in sexual abuse civil cases. Damages in sex abuse cases are…
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…
Mar 30, 2023
The Alberta Court of Appeal recently sent a strong message to insureds: utmost good faith is not only key but is required in insurance claims.…
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 18, 2023
Regulatory bodies across Canada are finding themselves subject to increased scrutiny in light of concerns surrounding workforce shortages,…
Dec 13, 2022
The insurer’s duty to defend a claim made against its insured is inextricably tied to coverage: there can be no duty to defend without a…
Nov 21, 2022
On November 10, 2022, the Supreme Court of Canada examined the interaction of arbitration and bankruptcy and insolvency proceedings, deciding a…
Nov 8, 2022
The October 3, 2022, decision of the Newfoundland and Labrador Court of Appeal to dismiss the decision of the Newfoundland and Labrador Pharmacy…
Sep 28, 2022
On August 25, 2022, the P.E.I. Supreme Court dismissed an appeal of the P.E.I. College of Registered Nurses Hearing Committee in Llewellyn v.…
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…
Apr 18, 2022
On March 28, 2022, the Supreme Court of Newfoundland and Labrador (General Division) decided that in a personal injury case, quantification of…
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…
Mar 29, 2022
The Supreme Court of Canada’s recent consideration of estoppel and waiver in the context of a fatal injury case in Trial Lawyers Association…
Mar 4, 2022
On December 17, 2021, New Brunswick’s Local Governance Reform Act (Bill 82) amending the N.B. Local Governance Act (and other related acts and…
Feb 8, 2022
We updated this publication on December 15, 2022. On May 17, 2022, the P.E.I. Non-disclosure Agreements Act took effect, significantly…
Feb 3, 2022
On January 26, 2022, the British Columbia Court of Appeal extended an injunction preventing protesters from interfering with a logging…
Dec 16, 2021
We updated this publication on December 21, 2022. The name of the game is to have a plan to mitigate the risk that a data breach will happen…
Nov 23, 2021
On November 19, 2021, in Trial Lawyers Association of British Columbia v. Royal & Sun Alliance Insurance Company of Canada, the Supreme…
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…
Oct 29, 2021
On October 21, 2021, the Supreme Court of Canada clarified the law concerning the circumstances in which government organizations - including…
Sep 23, 2021
On September 9, 2021, the Nova Scotia Court of Appeal released its decision in Aviva Insurance v. PK Construction Ltd. Dealing with Nova…
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…
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
We udpated this publication on March 4, 2022. Privacy is critical to every business in every sector, including startups and growing…
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…
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…
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 11, 2020
New types of claims will emerge while insurers may see an evolution or even decrease in the traditional types. Here are the types of claims and…
May 11, 2020
The Supreme Court of Canada recently released a much-awaited decision regarding the Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act (CCAA). The CCAA is…
Apr 17, 2020
The global and domestic spread of COVID-19 has forced Canadians to reassess their upcoming travel plans – and insurers to assess their travel…
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 22, 2019
On November 20, 2019, the Nova Scotia Court of Appeal confirmed pursuant to section 113BA(1) of Nova Scotia’s Insurance Act, in the context of…
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…
Aug 8, 2019
This publication has been updated as at January 12, 2022. Canadian provinces are looking to immigration as a solution to labour market…
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…
Jan 21, 2019
On January 18, 2019, the Nova Scotia Court of Appeal rendered its unanimous (5-0) decision in Holland v. Sparks, overturning a motion decision…
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…
Dec 4, 2018
On November 30, 2018, a majority of the judges of the Supreme Court of Canada decided the media doesn’t get any special protection from the…
Oct 25, 2018
NOTE: On November 20, 2019, the Nova Scotia Court of Appeal upheld the trial court’s decision and confirmed pursuant to section 113BA(1) of…
Oct 12, 2018
On October 11, 2018, the Nova Scotia Court of Appeal released its first decision considering the saving provision in Section 12 of Nova…
Aug 20, 2018
Every organization subject to Canada’s Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act (PIPEDA) - every organization that…
Aug 3, 2018
As of November 1, 2018, organizations in Canada subject to the Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act (PIPEDA) will face…
Jun 29, 2018
The Crown’s duty to consult Indigenous Peoples has evolved considerably since the Supreme Court of Canada’s first detailed articulation of…
Jun 13, 2018
Businesspeople (and their legal counsel) are on the road more than ever before: according to Statistics Canada, while Canada-U.S. traffic is…
Jun 11, 2018
On June 6, 2018, the Supreme Court of Canada considered the test for jurisdiction over an allegedly defamatory Internet article – the…
May 11, 2018
On May 8, 2018, for the first time, the Nova Scotia Supreme Court has ruled on the deductibility of Workers’ Compensation Board Extended…
Apr 26, 2018
The N.S. Court of Appeal has reached two decisions ending one employee’s quest for coverage of the costs of his medical marijuana – at least…
Apr 17, 2018
This publication has been updated as at January 12, 2023. There’s no shortage of media coverage about a doctor shortage in Canada and the…
Feb 15, 2018
Mandatory interlocutory injunctions - court orders, made in the context of a lawsuit, that a party take positive action as opposed to refrain…
Jan 25, 2018
Insurers have generally been leery of coverage for medical cannabis in both the health benefit claims and in cost of care claims in the personal…
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…
Dec 23, 2017
Parents often threaten their children that if their behaviour did not improve they will get a lump of coal in their Christmas stockings. On…
Jul 28, 2017
All stakeholders in any major project development already know that adequate consultation before - rather than after - a project is approved is…
Jul 18, 2017
On July 12, 2017, the Federal Court of Canada made it clear that there are but two ways to avoid a tariff set by the Copyright Board of Canada…
Jul 10, 2017
The legal landscape of cannabis (a.k.a. marihuana, weed, pot …) is changing, both reflecting - and contributing to - more relaxed attitudes…
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…
May 26, 2017
On May 19, 2017, the Supreme Court of Canada agreed to hear the appeal of the Federal Court of Appeal’s 2016 decision in Canada v Mikisew Cree…
May 3, 2017
On May 2, 2017, the N.S. Court of Appeal decided another case involving the deductibility of CPP disability benefits – but this time, in the…
Apr 21, 2017
In three years (lightning speed in the law), medically assisted dying went from being illegal to being legal. A great deal has changed, a great…
Apr 20, 2017
On April 13, 2017, Canada’s federal government introduced legislation that, if passed into law, will legalize recreational cannabis in Canada.…
Apr 6, 2017
Adding a third jurisdiction to Gard Update’s comparison between privilege in the corporate context under U.S. and English law, McInnes Cooper…
Apr 5, 2017
NOTE: Consultants who were already lobbying and in-house lobbyists already employed by an organization when the new Act took effect were…
Mar 15, 2017
On March 9, 2017, the N.S. Court of Appeal stopped building inspection claims in their tracks when it decided that a defence based section…
Feb 24, 2017
This publication has been updated as at January 12, 2023. Many organization (66%) store the personal information of customers. employees,…
Jan 30, 2017
On January 27, 2017, the Supreme Court of Canada decided in Sabean v. Portage La Prairie Mutual Insurance Co. that future CPP disability…
Jan 25, 2017
Doing business with the public sector creates an often overlooked – but very real – risk that the confidential information a business…
Dec 5, 2016
It’s been a long time coming, but Newfoundland and Labrador is finally getting new public procurement legislation. On November 29, 2016, Bill…
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…
Sep 19, 2016
On September 15, 2016, the Supreme Court of Canada decided certain damage to a building under construction was covered under the relevant…
Sep 12, 2016
On September 9, 2016, the Supreme Court of Canada decided in Musqueam Indian Band v. Musqueam Indian Band (Board of Review) that an Indian band…
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…
Jul 19, 2016
On July 15, 2016 the Supreme Court of Canada, in a long-awaited decision, resisted the invitation to re-write the traditional rules for the…
Jul 5, 2016
The Ontario Court of Appeal has re-ignited the discussion about when a municipality will be held liable for its shoddy bylaw enforcement…
Jun 20, 2016
As of July 1, 2016, packed cargo containers to which the International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea (SOLAS), Chapter VI, Regulation…
Jun 20, 2016
Real estate vendors and purchasers have high expectations of their realtors – and they don’t often hesitate to pursue legal action against…
Jun 17, 2016
In its June 16, 2016 decision in Rogers Communications Inc. v. Châteauguay (City), the Supreme Court of Canada decided a municipality’s…
May 24, 2016
It’s now certain: in Newfoundland & Labrador, liens can’t be placed on Crown land or holdbacks with the possible exemption allowing for…
May 10, 2016
On May 6, 2016, the Supreme Court of Canada generally affirmed the common law rule that positive covenants do not run with the land. More…
Apr 15, 2016
On April 14, 2016, Canada’s federal Justice Minister proposed legislation setting out the conditions that a person wishing to undergo…
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…
Jan 18, 2016
On January 14, 2016, the Ontario Superior Court decided that Canadians have a clear privacy interest in their records of their cellular…
Sep 29, 2015
The anti-spam sections of Canada’s Anti-spam Legislation (CASL) took effect on July 1, 2014 amidst hype, controversy and dire warnings. Were…
Jul 29, 2015
On July 27, 2015, the Federal Court of Canada decided a lawsuit by medical marijuana program participants against the Federal Government…
Jul 21, 2015
On July 16, 2015, the New Brunswick Court of Appeal ordered an insurer to produce a significant amount of its financial and business information…
Jun 8, 2015
On June 4, 2015, the NS Court of Appeal decided the value of future CPP disability benefits is deductible under the SEF 44 family protection…
Jun 2, 2015
Effective April 22, 2015 the NS Government enacted the NS Missing Persons Act, lowering the threshold for police to get an order to access…
Apr 15, 2015
On April 15, 2015 the Supreme Court of Canada decided the City of Saguenay’s recitation of a religious - though non-denominational – prayer…
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)…
Feb 18, 2015
The new NS Limitations of Actions Act – the legislation that determines the limitation period (time limit) in which a lawsuit must be started…
Feb 9, 2015
NOTE: On April 14, 2016, the federal government proposed legislation setting out the conditions that a person wishing to undergo…
Feb 2, 2015
On January 30, 2015 the Supreme Court of Canada decided that the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedom’s protection for freedom of…
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…
Nov 3, 2014
Note: On November 20, 2014 the NS Government passed the final form of Bill 64, Limitations of Actions Act into law. The final form of the Act…
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…
Sep 9, 2014
Effective October 1, 2014, the New Brunswick Rules of Court will change – some Rules for the first time since they came into effect in 1982.…
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 26, 2014
On May 23, 2014 the Federal Court of Canada decided the Federal Treasury Board Secretariat’s interpretation of the policy for compensating…
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…
May 2, 2014
April showers bring … flood and sewage back-up claims. Flooding and sewage back-up can result in significant damage for municipal ratepayers,…
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…
Mar 19, 2014
As organizations turn to cloud computing services, ensuring compliance with legislation and reducing privacy risks is key. In Canada, there is…
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 SCC decided police require specific authorization in a search warrant to search the data in a computer because of the…
May 21, 2013
In its April 2013 decision in Re Stan, the Alberta Securities Commission provides issuers with a practical approach to the assessment of both a…
Jan 8, 2013
On November 19, 2012, the Supreme Court of Canada (SCC) unanimously ruled a B.C. public school system’s failure to provide adequate and…
Nov 28, 2012
On October 19, 2012 the Supreme Court of Canada (SCC) decided that a teacher criminally charged with possession of child pornography and…
Oct 22, 2012
Mr. Cole was a high school teacher with an employer owned and issued laptop computer. He also used it for incidental personal purposes, which…
May 6, 2011
In March 2011, the Ontario Court of Appeal found that an employee had a limited expectation of privacy in the contents of a work computer. The…
Apr 7, 2011
Note: Click here to read an updated version of this Legal Update in Cloud Computing: A Privacy FAQ as seen in as seen in CCCA Magazine, Spring…
Mar 6, 2009
“Contamination Claims: Long Tails or Just Dogs? Practical and Legal Issues of Litigating Contaminant Slow-Leak Cases”, Cdn Journal of…
Subscribe to McInnes Cooper to stay current with our leading insights on legal updates, trends, news, events, and services.