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
Episode 177: Chris Dinn on Bill C-18’s Harm to Torontoverse and Investment in Innovative Media in Canada
byMichael Geist

September 18, 2023
Michael Geist
July 24, 2023
Michael Geist
July 17, 2023
Michael Geist
July 10, 2023
Michael Geist
Search Results placeholder
Recent Posts
The Law Bytes Podcast, Episode 178: Bianca Wylie on Canada’s Failing AI Regulatory Process
Why the Government is Quietly Undermining Competition Bureau Independence in Bill C-56
A Reality Check on the Online News Act: Why Bill C-18 Has Been a Total Policy Disaster
The Law Bytes Podcast, Episode 177: Chris Dinn on Bill C-18’s Harm to Torontoverse and Investment in Innovative Media in Canada
Why the Government’s Draft Bill C-18 Regulations Don’t Work: The 4% Link Tax is Not a Cap. It’s a Floor.