Canada: The Low-Down On PIPEDA Requests In Personal Injury Cases

Last Updated: May 17 2017
Article by R. Lee Akazaki

Seemingly out of nowhere, institutional litigants, insurers and the third-party vendors they retain to support their obligations in responding to claims have been inundated with requests for disclosure on pain of complaints or actions to collect damages under the Canadian federal Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act (PIPEDA).  In some instances, parties or their lawyers directly approach non-parties such as medical experts and private investigation companies and demand production of documents separately from any disclosure procedures in the claims or law suits.

It is hard to point to any single rationale for employing the resort to the federal privacy legislation, except that obtaining access to personal information is probably not one of them.  Traditionally, a party to a personal injury law suit would, through his or her lawyer, be the conduit for information in health records, employment files and other personal data.  The defendant or respondent would be the one making the disclosure request, in order to verify a claim or instruct a medical expert in advance of a medical examination.  If the plaintiff or claimant wanted to obtain the independent medical examiner's notes, he or she would ask for them from the defendant or insurer's counsel.  It is therefore counter-intuitive for the injured party to be making the PIPEDA request of the defendant or respondent.  Approaching experts and other hired witnesses behind the back of an adverse party in litigation is also an ethical grey area.

So why would anyone make such a request?  The reasons for casting the PIPEDA net can include:

  • gaining access to draft reports, to obtain evidence of undue influence on court experts
  • obtaining billing records to discredit experts on the basis of payments received to perform examinations and give opinions
  • investigation of communications to look for information of bias or bad faith
  • provoking an adversarial contest with an independent witness, to be used to discredit the witness' independence at trial
  • launching a complaint and damages suit for slow or inadequate compliance with disclosure requests

There need not be a particular thought-out strategy, in that each request can potentially serve one or more purpose such as the ones outlined above.  Where the law firm sends out "PIPEDA requests" as a matter of course, on a template, the practice is not dissimilar to the practice of bulk demand letters that have come under increased scrutiny by Ontario's Law Society: LSUC v. Deanna Lynn Natale; and legal ethics academics: Salyzyn, "Zealous Advocacy or Exploitive Shakedown?".

The purpose of this article is not to delve into the particular ethics or legalities of these methods or tactics.  Rather, it is to point out some basic misunderstandings of PIPEDA that these targeted efforts seek to create or exploit.

Purpose of PIPEDA to Regulate Information Retention in Commercial Activity

For those who remember, the legislative history leading to the 2000 enactment of PIPEDA was pretty straightforward.  As the Canadian Privacy Commissioner's Guide to the legislation shows, the Act was driven by Industry Canada as a means of promoting public confidence in the new digital economy.  The Office of the Privacy Commissioner was placed in charge of administering the Act because of its existing expertise regulating the collection of information by federal government agencies.  A random search of Privacy Office decisions and activity would show that the purpose of the regime is to allow Canadians access to data held by businesses, such as financial institutions and credit rating bodies.

The use of the legislation to gain advantages in injury litigation or insurance claims therefore falls outside the purpose of promoting consumer confidence when they shop for clothes online, or when applying for financing on a new car.  Therefore, the first question that one must ask as a recipient of a "PIPEDA request" in the course of such litigation or claims is whether the custodian of the personal information is engaged in a "commercial activity" when it obtained the information.

The scope of PIPEDA has been interpreted by the courts to include parties collecting information regarding an insurance claim, such as a claim for no-fault accident benefits following an auto accident.  On the other hand, information such as surveillance collected during the course of a defence of a tort action has been held not to be commercial in nature, because business before the courts is not commercial: State Farm Mutual Ins. Co. v. Canada (Privacy Comm.)  A recent decision of the Privacy Commissioner, published in 2017, has confirmed that its policy now reflects State Farm.  PIPEDA cannot be used to circumvent the court rules for obtaining disclosures.

Personal Information, Not Business Information, is Protected

As one might gather from the legislative purpose, the Canadian Parliament's intention was to allow individuals in the digital economy to gain ease of access to information that businesses collect from them, to ensure the data is secure, and to afford the opportunity to correct information such as bad credit ratings.  The legislation did not contemplate providing access to the businesses' own information.

The nexus between personal information and the use made of it has been the subject of controversy.  Individuals seeking advantages in claims or litigation have cited PIPEDA in seeking draft reports, billing information and other work product information passing between service providers such as medical experts and those who hire them, such as insurers and employers.  While each case must be considered on its individual merits, the overriding principle is that individuals are allowed access to the personal information obtained from them, such as doctors' history notes and medical records supplied by an insurance adjuster.  PIPEDA cannot be cited as authority for seeking information beyond what the individual has actually provided or the use that has been made of the information.  The ruling in Windowe v. Rousseau is often misstated as rationale for complete disclosure from a doctor performing an independent examination.  In fact, the Federal Court held that access was only available to the notes containing the personal information and the final report provided to the insurer:

In light of the Privacy Commissioner's recognition that there are in the notes information which is personal to Mr. Rousseau and information which is not, it may be said that in the end, Mr. Rousseau has a right of access to the information he gave the doctor, and to the final opinion of the doctor in the form of the report to the insurer. In accordance with Principle 4.9.1. of Schedule I to the PIPED Act, this enables Mr. Rousseau to correct any mistakes in the information he gave the doctor or which the doctor noted, as well as any mistakes in the doctor's reasoned final opinion about his medical condition. But the process of getting to that final opinion from the initial personal information of Mr. Rousseau belongs to the doctor.

Breach of PIPEDA is not a Breach of Something Else

It is important to observe that the entity that has jurisdiction over PIPEDA is the Privacy Commissioner.  It is only after a report by the Privacy Commissioner finding a breach of the Act that an affected party can seek enforcement of the Act before the Federal Court of Canada.  Therefore, a threat to complain to a regulatory body such as a provincial professional college is somewhat misleading because such entities do not have the jurisdiction or the expertise to determine whether there has been a breach of the privacy regime.  For example, a PIPEDA request citing the Ontario College of Physicians and Surgeons' (CPSO) bulletin on Third Party Reports might find the following advice:

Physicians must comply with any statutory obligations they may have to provide access to reports, documents or notes. This includes but is not limited to applicable obligations under Ontario and Canadian privacy legislation.

Such advice is helpful to doctors, but there is no legislation, regulation or code of conduct bringing physician PIPEDA compliance (i.e. record-keeping outside clinical practice) within the CPSO's regulatory or disciplinary power.  The CPSO also does not have jurisdiction over private medical assessment companies.

Threatening a Suit for Damages

Under s. 16(c) of PIPEDA, an individual can seek an order from the Federal Court of Canada for an award of damages, including damages for humiliation.  However, there is no direct right to sue.  Under s. 14, a plaintiff can only sue after a Privacy Commissioner report rules in the individual's favour that an organization has breached his or her rights under PIPEDA.  Thereafter, the report is not binding on the court, and the court is at liberty to disagree that there was ever a breach.

Even where the court agrees with the Commissioner that there was a breach, the typical order is to require the organization to comply with disposition recommended by the Commissioner.  This is no small matter, as intentional disobedience with the court order can lead to a finding of contempt of court.

Damages, on the other hand, are not easy to obtain.  The leading case on the legal threshold for awarding damages is Randall v. Nubodys Fitness Centres.  Consistent with the legislative purpose of protecting privacy in digital commerce, the court held that damages should only be awarded "in the most egregious situations," such as videotaping in private quarters and phone tapping.  A bona fide mistake in the scope of a document disclosure cannot, based on this principle, give rise to automatic liability for damages.  The most recent decision as of time of writing, a 2017 decision in A.T. v. Globe24h, awarded $5,000  (a typical award) in damages against a company that published the complainant's private information online.  Having regard to the case law, a custodian of records' delay or refusal to provide access to data generated in an insurance claim or law suit would be difficult to place in this category of complaint.

A PIPEDA request containing a threat of damages would likely be misleading, if one followed the reasoning in Natale and in Salyzyn's paper.  Given that a party can sue for damages only after the Commissioner's finding of a breach, there is no basis for threatening a suit in a simple request for disclosure or access.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

In association with
Related Topics
Related Articles
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
Email Address
Company Name
Confirm Password
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Media & IT
 Real Estate
 Wealth Mgt
Asia Pacific
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
United States
Worldwide Updates
Registration (you must scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of

To Use you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.


The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.


Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions