Top Stories -   

1

Skurka's Spin: Court decision 'marked stellar day for privacy'

Steven Skurka Steven Skurka
Steven Skurka

View Larger Image

A A |  Email ThisEmail  | PrintComments (5) Facebook   

Date: Monday Jan. 23, 2012 7:22 AM ET

It is incredible to consider the amount of personal and sensitive information about our daily lives that is captured and stored in electronic databases.

This includes our banking, shopping and travel records, the medicine we order, the hospital procedures and medical tests we undergo and the nature of our repeated communication and correspondence by cell phone, e-mail or text message.

We correctly assume that all of this information retained on the Internet and on digital technology is private. But is there a legal remedy available if our privacy is breached?

What recourse is there if a curious employer, a rogue investigator, a snoopy neighbour or an angry former spouse hacks into any of the the various databases and accesses this highly personal information?

The Ontario Court of Appeal forcefully decided in a landmark decision last week that a legal claim may arise in circumstances where there has been a deliberate and significant invasion of personal privacy.

In the lawsuit considered in the Court of Appeal judgment, a Bank of Montreal employee admitted to snooping on the banking records of a fellow employee who was previously married to her common-law partner. The snooping occurred almost two hundred times over a period of several years. The Court of Appeal found a breach of privacy (the legal term is a claim for intrusion upon seclusion) and awarded a modest amount of damages of $10,000.

This bold decision of the Ontario Court of Appeal introduced for the first time in Canada a welcome protection for privacy rights and served notice on hackers and snoopers that they may be civilly liable if they persist in their surreptitious practices. It marked a stellar day for privacy.

Comments are now closed for this story

Steven S.
said

Gregg,The Criminal Code specifically provides for the execution of an authorized search warrant to search any data contained in or available on a computer system.


Will
said

Gregg, consider this to be a corollery to the old saying that if you do not want a thing heard, do not say it.


William
said

What about Government agencies and how they are trying to control the internet? Seems this is an isolated case which doesn't have precedence for dealing with broad-based privacy infringements in an effort to mine data. This can also be taken to include all these sites that track your online activity and sell the information. I installed Ghostery on my browser to stop some of the subtle invasion of my privacy but I'm not sure if that is enough so I divulge less now.


Alyx Crawford
said

Gregg -- I believe there is a tremendous difference between our legitimate confidential records and information that is "on the net."


Gregg
said

What about searching without warrant or reasonable cause by authorities, especially since the US has practically declared if it's on the net, it belongs to them?


Share with your social Network:

Facebook DIGG Newsvine Delicious Twitter StumbeUpon Reddit Yahoo! Buzz

 

Advertisement

Contest

Today's Top Stories

Labour Minister Lisa Raitt speaks in the House of Commons in Ottawa on Monday, May 28, 2012. (Adrian Wyld / THE CANADIAN PRESS)

Federal government orders end to CP Rail strike

More   51 Comments 51    10 Video(s) 10

Dominic and Abby Maryk were found in Mexico four years after allegedly being abducted by their father.

Extradition sought in Winnipeg missing children case

More   4 Comments 4    3 Video(s) 3

Protesters opposing Quebec student tuition fee hikes demonstrate in Montreal, Sunday, May 27, 2012. (Graham Hughes / THE CANADIAN PRESS)

Quebec, students resume talks on tuition hikes

More   26 Comments 26    1 Video(s) 1