Canada: Class Actions In Canada Part 4: A Cross-Border Perspective On Privacy Class Actions

Last Updated: July 24 2018
Article by Molly Reynolds

In this installment of our class action series, we explore trends in Canadian privacy class actions and point out similarities and differences in the approaches taken in the United States and Canada in these types of lawsuits.

Canadian privacy class actions have been on the rise for the last decade, emerging from a wealth of new technologies, novel business practices, new legislation and common law torts, and an ever-growing body of jurisprudence south of the border. In both Canada and the U.S., privacy class actions largely fall into three categories:

  1. claims that challenge a corporation's business practices (e.g., cookies, targeted advertising);
  2. claims that arise from accidental breaches (e.g., lost storage devices); and
  3. claims relating to intentional, targeted misconduct (e.g., hacking, employee snooping).

In all categories, the size of the classes and the quantum of damages claimed tend to be large—actions involving approximately 1 million consumers and seeking $1 billion in damages are not uncommon. Importantly however, most cases settle for a fraction of the compensation sought. Generally, plaintiffs must establish some evidence of actual harm and may not simply seek damages for mere fear of identity theft, although no decisions have yet tested the line between harm and mere fear in a trial on the merits.1 Although moral damages for humiliation or anxiety arising from privacy violations are sometimes awarded, they are nominal—in the range of $2,000–$20,000 per claim.

Business Practices

Canadian privacy class actions challenging business models and practices relating to the handling of personal information are frequently commenced but the jurisprudence in this area is limited: although courts are increasingly willing to find privacy claims that meet the low bar for certification, few proceedings to date have been decided on their merits.2

Online services or products that actively encourage users to provide, use and share personal information—notably social media companies—are particularly exposed to this type of claim. Other recent examples of privacy class actions related to business practices include the unauthorized collection of intimate data related to the use of sexual aid products,3 unauthorized access to client financial information by an insurance company,4 and Google's collection of cellular location data without user consent and even when location services were disabled.5

Litigants have claimed that a company's use or disclosure of personal information has exposed them to harms such as identity theft, harassment, embarrassment and mental distress.6 Legal claims have been brought on the basis of a reasonable expectation that businesses will protect customers' personal information, a company's alleged contravention of its own privacy policy, the alleged collection, use or disclosure of personal information without consent, breaches of provincial privacy statutes, and assertions that a company diverted users' private data to third parties for profit. Global technology companies are often named in tag-along class proceedings in Canada following the commencement, or settlement, of similar actions in the U.S.

Recently, a class action was commenced against We-Vibe (operating as Standard Innovation Corporation). The Statement of Claim alleges that highly intimate and sensitive user data related to the company's sexual aid products was collected, used, and stored without consent.7 In 2017, a settlement was reached in the U.S. related to the same complaint for approximately US$3.75 million.8

Between 2007 and 2010, Google Street View allegedly collected snippets of electronic data sent or received through an unsecured wireless network while scanning these networks to verify the location of Street View cars. In May 2018, the Superior Court of Québec approved a $1 million settlement in this case, the majority of which was intended to fund a research project at the University of Ottawa and the University of Montréal related to internet data protection and privacy.9 A similar class action commenced in the U.S. in 2010 and as of June 2018, the parties were reported to have reached a preliminary settlement that is rumoured to include donations to non-profit organizations; however, a settlement amount was not publicly provided.10

Mishaps

From misplacing a hard drive to the inadvertent transmission of customer information, accidental privacy breaches and related class actions often result from mishaps by employees or contractors.11 These claims frequently allege negligence, intentional torts of invasion of privacy, failure to meet institutional and industry security standards, and test the scope of employers' vicarious liability for the conduct of personnel.

In both Canada and the U.S., mishap privacy class actions are less common than those falling into the other two categories. One recent Canadian example involves the disclosure of personal health information of prospective participants in a research study, including information that identified these individuals as HIV-positive.12 The information was disclosed because the organization failed to send study recruitment materials in a secure manner to protect the privacy of the recipients.

Intentional Conduct

Privacy breaches and accompanying class proceedings also follow intentional activity such as the theft of devices or files containing personal information, third-party breaches into databases containing private and confidential information, the sale of contact information to third parties, and employee snooping for personal or romantic reasons.13 Many recent privacy class actions have arisen from intrusions into the computer systems of social media giants such as Facebook,14 web service providers such as Yahoo,15 financial institutions, credit reporting agencies such as Equifax,16 and high-profile retailers such as Walmart and the Home Depot.17

Canadian courts appear to be conscious of the proliferation of privacy class actions and the need to distinguish spurious claims from those in which class members suffered actual harm.

The 2016 Ontario decision approving the settlement in the Home Depot payment system breach provides guidance to companies on breach response techniques that will minimize litigation risks. Following the discovery of malware on its in-store payment systems in 2014, the Home Depot promptly issued press releases, notified customers by email, publicly apologized, and offered credit monitoring and identity theft insurance without requiring proof of loss or card compromise. The Ontario court, approving the settlement of the class action that followed the breach, noted the "responsible, prompt, generous and exemplary" response of the Home Depot to the criminal acts and indicated that the class action members' likelihood of success in terms of proving liability or consequent damages was "in the range of negligible to remote." Although made in the context of a settlement approval rather than a hearing on the merits, this case suggests Canadian courts are conscious of the proliferation of privacy class actions and the need to distinguish spurious claims from those in which class members suffered actual harm.

In contrast, in the U.S., consumer claims arising out of the same incident settled for up to $13 million plus the cost of credit monitoring services for victims of the breach and implementation of security practice changes.18 Additionally, U.S. financial institutions brought a class action against the Home Depot for the costs of issuing credit cards and reimbursements for fraudulent charges to victims of the breach. In 2017, this claim settled for $25 million.19

A recent British Columbia decision sheds light on what plaintiffs are required to prove in terms of damages in privacy class action lawsuits. The Supreme Court of British Columbia recently certified a class action against a trust company for inadequately securing client personal information.20 The trust company experienced a system breach by cybercriminals who used the personal information to contact individuals through text messages purporting to be from the defendant trust company.21 The class in this case alleged the text messages were attempts at "phishing," and sought damages for mental distress, among other forms of damages. The Court commented that the mental distress alleged by the plaintiff did not rise to the level of "serious and prolonged and [...] above the ordinary annoyances" referred to in Supreme Court of Canada case Mustapha,22 and that "inconvenience, frustration and anxiety are part of normal life."23

According to a recent U.S. law report, the trend in terms of finding standing in privacy class actions is favourable towards plaintiffs.24 This trend holds true even where consumers do not suffer economic loss or experience identity theft and despite the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling in Spokeo in 2016 that plaintiffs must show "injury-in-fact" that is "concrete" and "particularized."25 This trend has been attributed to both the increased incidence of larger and more frequent breaches that would otherwise leave many without legal recourse, as well as to evolving notions of harm to include property violations. 26 These observations were made at the stage of a motion to dismiss, and therefore, like in Canada, there is currently little insight into how courts will view the nature of damages in a decision on the merits.

Additional Cross-Border Comments

Compared to Canada, many more privacy class actions are commenced in the U.S. due to a more litigious climate and higher population. Canadian class actions are growing in number, but Canada is still developing its statutory causes of actions related to misuses of technology, while the data breach privacy class actions in the U.S. are largely founded on statutes such as the Electronic Communications Privacy Act and the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act. Unlike the U.S., Canada has an expansive federal regulatory regime—the Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act, which provides a simple administrative procedure for complaints and remedies, arguably making class actions less preferable. The European Union (EU) General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), which purports to extend to organizations based outside the EU that offer goods or services to individuals in the EU or to those who engage in practices that monitor online behaviour of individuals in the EU, may impact privacy litigation and force business to modify their practices in the U.S. and Canada.

Footnote

1 Larose v. Banque Nationale de Canada, 2010 QCCS 5385.

2 See e.g., Douez v. Facebook, Inc., 2014 BCSC 953 (certification), 2017 SCC 33 (holding forum selection clause unenforceable); 2018 BCCA 186 (appeal from certification); Albilia v. Apple Inc., 2013 QCCS 2805; Union des Consommateurs c. Bell Canada, 2011 QCCS 1118; Latham v. Facebook et al., Ontario Superior Court of Justice, Court File No. CV-14-501879 (2014); Tocco et al. v. Bell Mobility, Ontario Superior Court of Justice, Court File No. CV-15-00022122 (2015).

3 L.S. and M.C. v. Standard Innovation Corporation, Ontario Superior Court of Justice, Court File No. 17-72314-e (2017).

4 Haikola v. The Personal Insurance Company and Desjardins General Insurance Group Inc., Federal Court, Court File No. T-382-18 (2018).

5 Warner v. Google LLC, Supreme Court of British Columbia, Court File No. VLC-S-S-1711066 (2017).

6 See e.g., Haikola v. The Personal Insurance Company and Desjardins General Insurance Group Inc., Federal Court, Court File No. T-382-18 (2018); Warner v. Google LLC, Supreme Court of British Columbia, Court File No. VLC-S-S-1711066 (2017); L.S. and M.C. v. Standard Innovation Corporation, Ontario Superior Court of Justice, Court File No. 17-72314-e (2017); Benmouffok, et al. v. Life Insurance Company Manufacturers, et al., Ontario Superior Court of Justice, Court File No. 17073294 CP (2017); Silvestri v. Facebook, Inc., No. C10-00429 (N.D. Cal. 2010).

7 L.S. and M.C. v. Standard Innovation Corporation, Ontario Superior Court of Justice, Court File No. 17-72314-e (2017).

8 Christina Davis, "Vibrator Maker Will Pay $3.75M to Settle Privacy Class Action", (2017) Top Class Actions, online:https://topclassactions.com/lawsuit-settlements/lawsuit-news/534274-vibrator-maker-pay-3-75m-settle-privacy-class-action/.

9 Elkoby v. Google Canada Corp. and Google Inc., Quebec Superior Court, Court File No. 500-06-000567-111 (2018) (judgment approving settlement).

10 See re Google LLC Street View Electronic Communications Litigation, No. 3:10-md-02184-CRB (N.D. Ca. Jun. 15, 2018) (joint motion for administrative relief to file under seal). Wendy Davis, "Google Likely to Resolve WiFi Snooping Case With Nonprofit Donations" (2018) Digital News Daily, online: https://www.mediapost.com/publications/article/320928/google-likely-to-resolve-wifi-snooping-case-with-n.html.

11 See e.g., M.M. v. Lanark, Leeds and Grenville Children's Aid Society, 2017 ONSC 7665; MacEachern v. Ford Motor Company of Canada, Ltd. and John Doe Corporation, Ontario Superior Court of Justice, Court File No. CV-13-18955-CP (2013); Waters v. DaimlerChrysler Services Canada Inc., 2009 SKQB 263; Belley v. TD Auto Finance Services Inc., 2015 QCCS 168; Rowlands v. Durham Region Health, 2011 ONSC 719 (certification), 2012 ONSC 3948 (settlement approval); Condon v. Canada, 2014 FC 250; Sofio c. Organisme canadien de réglementation du commerce des valeurs mobilières (OCRCVM), 2014 QCCS 4061.

12 John Doe 1 v. The University of British Columbia, Supreme Court of British Columbia, Court File No. S177329 (2017).

13 See e.g., Daniells v McLellan, 2017 ONSC 3466 (certification); Evans v. The Bank of Nova Scotia, 2014 ONSC 2135; Jones v. Tsige, 2012 ONCA 32.

14 Steven Chamberlain v. Facebook, Inc. and Facebook Canada Inc., Ontario Superior Court of Justice, Court File No. CV-18-598747009 (2018).

15 See e.g., Demers v. Yahoo! Inc. and Yahoo! Canada Co., Québec Superior Court, Court File No. 500-06-000842-175 (2017); Natalia Karasik v. Yahoo! Inc. and Yahoo! Canada Co., Ontario Superior Court of Justice, Court File No. CV-16-566248-00CP (2017).

16 Temple v. Equifax, Inc. and Equifax Canada Co., Supreme Court of British Columbia, Court File No. VLC-S-S-180347 (2018); Agnew Americano v. Equifax Canada Co. and Equifax, Inc., Ontario Superior Court of Justice, Court File No. CV-17-00582551-00CP (2017); Robert Dwight Johnson v. Equifax, Inc. and Equifax Canada Co., Court of Queen's Bench for Saskatchewan, Court File No. QBG 2290 of 2017; Daniel Li c. Equifax, Inc. et Equifax Canada Co., Québec Superior Court, Court File No. 500-06-000885-174 (2017).

17 Drew v. Walmart Canada Inc., 2016 ONSC 8067 (certification for settlement purposes), 2017 ONSC 3308 (judgment approving settlement); Maksimovic v. Sony of Canada Ltd., 2013 ONSC 4604; Theriault v. The Home Depot et al., Québec Superior Court, Court File N0. 500-06-000711-149 (2014); Lozanski v. The Home Depot et al., Ontario Superior Court of Justice, Court File No. CV-14-512624-00CP (2014).

18 Order Granting Final Approval of Class Action Settlement and Final Judgment, In re Home Depot, No. 1:14-md-02583-TWT (N.D. Ga. Aug. 23, 2016), ECF No. 260 (adopting settlement agreement, ECF No. 181-2).

19 See Final Order and Judgment at 3–6, In re Home Depot, No. 1:14-md-02583-TWT (N.D. Ga. Sept. 22, 2017), ECF No. 343 (adopting settlement agreement, ECF No. 327-3).

20 Tucci v. Peoples Trust Company, 2017 BCSC 1525.

21 Ibid.

22 Mustapha v. Culligan of Canada Ltd., 2008 SCC 27, [2008] 2 SCR 114 at para 9.

23 Tucci v. Peoples Trust Company, 2017 BCSC 1525 at para 198.

24 Travis LeBlanc & John R Knight, "A Wake-Up Call: Data Breach Standing is Getting Easier" (2018) 4:1 The Cybersecurity Law Report 1.

25 Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins, (2016) 136 S. Ct. 1540 (Supreme Court).

26 Travis LeBlanc & John R Knight, "A Wake-Up Call: Data Breach Standing is Getting Easier" (2018) 4:1 The Cybersecurity Law Report 1.

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 Mondaq.com.

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

Authors
Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
 
In association with
Related Topics
 
Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
Related Articles
 
Up-coming Events Search
Tools
Print
Font Size:
Translation
Channels
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
Password
Confirm Password
Position
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Accounting
 Anti-trust
 Commercial
 Compliance
 Consumer
 Criminal
 Employment
 Energy
 Environment
 Family
 Finance
 Government
 Healthcare
 Immigration
 Insolvency
 Insurance
 International
 IP
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Litigation
 Media & IT
 Privacy
 Real Estate
 Strategy
 Tax
 Technology
 Transport
 Wealth Mgt
Regions
Africa
Asia
Asia Pacific
Australasia
Canada
Caribbean
Europe
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
U.K.
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

Mondaq.com (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 www.mondaq.com

To Use Mondaq.com 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.

Disclaimer

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.

General

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