The Canadian Federal Court has rejected a Canadian Privacy Commissioner finding involving videosurveillance in a railway yard. After the Commissioner ruled in favour of the complainant in 2003, the complainant applied to the court for an order confirming the Commissioner’s decision. The court declined to do so, reaching several noteworthy conclusions. First, it ruled that PIPEDA should be classified as a fundamental law of Canada and can exist alongside the Canadian Labour Code. Second, the court ruled that it can accord the Privacy Commissioner some deference in the area of his or her expertise, though not on findings of fact. Third, the court ruled that this particular videosurveillance was reasonable and thus not a violation of PIPEDA. Case name is Eastmond v. Canadian Pacific Railway. see: Eastmond v. Canadian Pacific Railway also see: Bulte Committee Report
Canadian Fed Ct Rejects Privacy Commish Surveillance Finding
June 18, 2004
Share this post
![Law Bytes](https://www.michaelgeist.ca/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/Project.png)
Law Bytes
Episode 210: Meredith Lilly on the Trade Risks Behind Canada’s Digital Services Tax and Mandated Streaming Payments
byMichael Geist
![Episode 210: Meredith Lilly on the Trade Risks Behind Canada’s Digital Services Tax and Mandated Streaming Payments](https://www.michaelgeist.ca/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/Project.png)
July 15, 2024
Michael Geist
June 24, 2024
Michael Geist
Search Results placeholder
Recent Posts
The Law Bytes Podcast, Episode 210: Meredith Lilly on the Trade Risks Behind Canada’s Digital Services Tax and Mandated Streaming Payments
Abandoning Institutional Neutrality: Why the University of Windsor Encampment Agreements Constrain Academic Freedom and Freedom of Expression
The Law Bytes Podcast, Episode 209: Peter Menzies on Why the Canadian News Sector is Broken and How to Fix It
Why the University of Windsor Encampment Agreement Violates Antisemitism and Academic Freedom Standards
Know When to Fold Em: The Big Risk Behind Canada’s Digital Services Tax Bet