Date: 20030603
Docket: T-1717-01
Citation: 2003 FCT 705
Vancouver, British Columbia, Tuesday, the 3rd day of June, 2003
Present: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BLAIS
BETWEEN:
MATHEW ENGLANDER
Applicant
and
TELUS COMMUNICATIONS INC.
Respondent
APPLICATION UNDER subsection 14(1) of the Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act, S.C. 2000, c.5
REASONS FOR ORDER AND ORDER
[1] This is an application to the Court for a hearing pursuant to section 14 of the Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act, S.C. 2000, c.5 [the PIPEDA] in respect of a report prepared by George Radwanski, Privacy Commissioner of Canada [the PCC] in response to a complaint filed under section 11 of the PIPEDA by the Applicant against the Respondent. In his report, the PCC concluded that all aspects of the Applicant's complaint are not well-founded.
FACTS
[2] The Applicant, Mathew Englander, is a lawyer residing in Vancouver, British Columbia and a customer of TELUS Communications Inc. [TELUS] for local residential telephone service.
[3] The Respondent, TELUS, is a company incorporated under the laws of Canada, which, inter alia, conducts the regulated telecommunications business for British Columbia and Alberta.
[4] TELUS is regulated by the Canadian Radio-Television and Telecommunications Commission [the CRTC]. As a result, the CRTC may, through tariffs or the terms of its decisions, impose conditions on TELUS' provision of service to its customers.
[5] The CRTC is required, pursuant to paragraph 47(a) of the Telecommunications Act, to exercise its powers in a way that ensures a balance in the public interest between cultural, social and economic goals of a telecommunications network and to ensure that all rates charged by TELUS for regulated services are just and reasonable.
[6] Pursuant to section 7 of the Telecommunications Act, it is an express part of the CRTC's mandate to consider privacy issues in regulating the telecommunications industry. Accordingly, the CRTC considers privacy issues, including the application of relevant privacy statutes, in setting tariffs and making orders in connection with the telecommunications industry.
[7] On June 25 1996, the CRTC was ordered by the Governor in Council to report on the matter of directory listings, including the appropriate level of privacy protection that should be accorded to subscriber listings and to provide an evaluation of Non-Published Number Service [NPNS].
[8] Following the receipt of submissions from various entities and public interest groups, the CRTC issued Telecom Order CRTC 98-109, in which it concluded, inter alia, that to set a cost-based rate for NPNS would fail to take adequate account of considerations such as the usefulness of a reasonably complete directory and the revenue impact of reduced rates. However, the CRTC also concluded that it would be inappropriate if monthly rates for NPNS for residential subscribers remained at levels that were established in the past, i.e. with a view to maximizing revenues available to subsidize basic residential service.
[9] The CRTC ultimately concluded that TELUS should provide unlisted number service at a rate not exceeding $2.00 per month for residential subscribers and ordered TELUS to file revised tariff pages specifying a rate not exceeding $2.00, which it did, and the CRTC approved that rate.
[10] The TELUS Privacy Code is based on the Canadian Standards Association's "Model Code for the Protection of Personal Information" [the CSA Model Code], which has now been incorporated in the PIPEDA.
[11] Since February 2000, the Applicant has subscribed for NPNS for his residential phone number. NPNS is a regulated telecommunications service. The tariff applicable in British Columbia is CRTC 1005, General Tariff Item 145. It provides that the monthly service charge for NPNS is $2.00, which rate was set following Telecom Order CRTC 98-109.
[12] In addition to the $2.00 monthly fee, TELUS charges a one-time $9.50 set up fee for NPNS in British Columbia. The set-up fee is referred to in Tariff Item 145 by reference to Tariff Item 110. The set-up fee is the data-processing fee found in paragraph B of Tariff Item 110.
[13] Accordingly, TELUS has charged the Applicant $10.16, including GST, when he first obtained an unlisted number, and subsequently has charged him $2.14 per month, including GST, for NPNS.
[14] During the four years prior to February 2000, the Applicant had a listed residential phone number and when he changed to NPNS, he did not change his phone number, which option was open to him. Accordingly, outdated directories include the Applicant's listing information.
[15] TELUS and its affiliates use and disclose the names, addresses, and telephone numbers appearing in a directory [the listing information] of TELUS customers through various services:
- Printed telephone directories commonly known as the White Pages. There is one annual White Pages for the region described as "Metro Vancouver" and there are several others covering sub-regions or neighbourhoods within Vancouver. Each White Pages includes the listing information of TELUS' customers residing in the applicable region or sub-region who have not subscribed for NPNS.
- When new customers subscribe for local residential service, they are automatically included in the directories unless they also subscribe for NPNS. If they subscribe for NPNS, their listing must be manually "flagged" to ensure that their listing information is not included with the information that is provided to directory assistance and for the purpose of printing the directory. NPNS accounts also require ongoing extra security and special handling. Thus, the provision of NPNS results in some additional costs to TELUS.
- Dial-in directory assistance commonly known as "411", which TELUS offers to members of the general public, generally for a fee.
- Internet directory assistance called "People Finder", also offered to members of the general public. It is a service provided by TELUS Advanced Services Inc., an affiliate of TELUS. This service also offers a reverse-lookup function, whereby a member of the general public can enter a telephone number and find out listing information associated with it. However, the listing information of TELUS customers who have subscribed for NPNS is not included in the database.
- Through services called Directory File Service and Basic Listing Interchange File Service, TELUS discloses, for a fee, listing information of its customers. The CRTC requires TELUS to provide these services to independent directory publishers and certain other organizations, pursuant to Tariff Items 23 and 210 in British Columbia.
- TELUS' directory publisher, Dominion Information Services Inc. [Dominion], provides selected listing information, for a fee, to selected organizations [List Services]. The listing information so provided excludes all information for TELUS customers who have subscribed for NPNS as well as for those who have requested to be "de-listed".
- Dominion also provides listing information in a CD-ROM format that can be purchased as a retail product under licence to anyone who wishes to purchase it. The CD-ROM can be used for reference only, has limited printout availability, and is copy protected and encrypted to avoid misuse. The licences provide that it cannot be used to publish alternate directories or to print the entire contents.
[16] The only information that is provided through these services is information that is publicly available and specified as such by regulations to the PIPEDA.
[17] TELUS customers have the option of becoming "de-listed". TELUS' privacy brochure advises customers of the de-listing option, as does a portion of the White Pages. There is no charge for de-listing. Once de-listed, the customer listing information will continue to be published in the White Pages, as well as through directory assistance and Directory File Service and Basic Listing Interchange Service; however, the customer's listing information will not be included by TELUS or Dominion in the information provided as List Services nor will it be included from subsequent issues of the CD-ROM, which are typically issued every three to four months.
[18] By letter dated January 1, 2001, the Applicant filed a complaint to the PCC pursuant to subsection 11(1) of the PIPEDA, against TELUS so that an investigation could be conducted and a report prepared.
[19] Beginning in January 2001, the Applicant has withheld $2.14 per month from the amount paid to TELUS. On October 26, 2001, he sent TELUS a payment of $21.04 under protest, along with a letter to serve as notice that any and all payments made in future to TELUS would also be under protest.
[20] The PCC investigated the complaint and distributed a report to the parties on August 14, 2001. The PCC concluded that TELUS's practices were not in violation of the PIPEDA and that all of the allegations in the complaint were not well-founded.
THE PCC'S REPORT
...
... Customers are verbally asked how they would like their personal information to appear in TELUS' White Pages directory. It is implied that telephone numbers are published in publicly available telephone directories, and if a customer chooses not to have a non-published telephone number they indirectly consent to having their telephone number published in publicly available directories. I am satisfied that TELUS obtains valid consent from its customers to publish their telephone number in publicly available White Pages at the time telephone service is initiated.
... This Office provided representations to the CRTC in 1998 regarding this issue, and the CRTC took them into consideration in arriving at a position. I have concluded that TELUS has the authority under CRTC Tariff to charge its customers $2.00 per month for non-published telephone service and I do not find this an unreasonable practice so as to contravene principle 4.3.3 of the Schedule.
...
Section 5(1): The complaint alleges that TELUS is not in compliance with the obligations set out in Schedule 1 of the Act. I have concluded that TELUS is in full compliance with the Act. Therefore, this allegation is not well-founded.
Section 5(3): The complaint alleges that TELUS collects, uses or discloses personal information for purposes other than those a reasonable person would consider appropriate in the circumstances. I have concluded that a reasonable person would consider TELUS' initiation of service practice and subsequent publishing of customers' personal information in TELUS' White Pages an appropriate collection, use and disclosure of the information. Thus, I have concluded that this allegation is not well-founded.
Clause 4.3, Schedule 1: The complaint alleges that TELUS does not obtain consent from its customers to publish their personal information in publicly available directories. I have concluded that TELUS' practice of initiating service includes obtaining valid consent from its customers to publish their personal information in its publicly available White Pages Directory. Thus, this allegation is not well-founded.
Clause 4.5, Schedule 1: The complaint alleges that TELUS uses and discloses personal information for purposes other than those for which it was collected. I have concluded that TELUS obtains valid consent to publish customers' personal information in its White Pages Directory and, by doing so, customers consent to having their personal information available to the public. TELUS only discloses publicly available information as specified by the Act under the Regulations Specifying Publicly Available Information to Dominion Information Services in BC, and TELUS Advertising Services in Alberta, and therefore, is in compliance with the Act. Thus, I have concluded that this allegation is not well-founded.
Clause 4.7, Schedule 1: The complaint alleges that TELUS does not protect its customers' personal information by security safeguards appropriate to the sensitivity of the information. I have found no evidence on which to base a conclusion that TELUS is not in compliance with the Act in this regard. Therefore, this allegation is not well-founded.
Clause 4.9, Schedule 1: The complaint alleges that upon request, TELUS cannot confirm the existence, use and disclosure of its customers' personal information by external publishing companies and, in light of this, TELUS customers cannot access their personal information to challenge its accuracy available information as specified by the Act under the Regulations Specifying Publicly Available Information to Dominion Information Services in BC, and TELUS Advertising Services in Alberta. Therefore, I have concluded that this allegation is not well-founded.
[emphasis added]
SUBMISSIONS OF THE APPLICANT
[21] The Applicant submits that the legal test under the PIPEDA is not whether a practice is unreasonable but whether it contravenes the specific provisions of the Act.
[22] Accordingly, the Applicant contends that the Respondent contravenes the PIPEDA by allowing its customers' listing information to be used without their knowledge and consent in various data banks.
[23] Furthermore, the Applicant submits that under the PIPEDA, express consent is required for TELUS to use or disclose its customers' listing information.
[24] The Applicant also argues that the Respondent's practice of charging customers for an unlisted number is not authorized by the PIPEDA.
SUBMISSIONS OF THE RESPONDENT
[25] The Respondent submits that the Applicant does not complain of the use or disclosure by TELUS of his personal information without his knowledge and consent and as such, he does not possess personal interest in the consent issue; the principle of interest standing does not have application in this proceeding, therefore the Applicant lacks standing on this issue.
[26] In any event, the Respondent submits that, where required by the PIPEDA, TELUS does obtain the consent of its residential customers, for its use and disclosure of their listing information.
[27] The Respondent alleges that the PIPEDA does not restrict TELUS from charging a fee for the provision of NPNS. In the alternative, if this Court finds that PIPEDA does restrict TELUS' ability to charge a fee for the provision of NPNS, it does so only to the extent that the fee is unreasonable. The Respondent however argues that the fee in question is reasonable.
ISSUES
1. Does TELUS have valid consent under the PIPEDA to publish its customers' personal information in TELUS directories?
2. Does the PIPEDA restrict TELUS from charging a fee for the provision of NPNS?
ANALYSIS
[28] The present application is made under section 14 of the PIPEDA, which provides that:
14. (1) A complainant may, after receiving the Commissioner's report, apply to the Court for a hearing in respect of any matter in respect of which the complaint was made, or that is referred to in the Commissioner's report, and that is referred to in clause 4.1.3, 4.2, 4.3.3, 4.4, 4.6, 4.7 or 4.8 of Schedule 1, in clause 4.3, 4.5 or 4.9 of that Schedule as modified or clarified by Division 1, in subsection 5(3) or 8(6) or (7) or in section 10.
[29] The present hearing is therefore not an appeal of the Commissioner's report, nor is it an application for judicial review in an administrative legal sense.
[30] Accordingly, I am required to exercise my own discretion de novo.
[31] As such, and if required, this Court has the power to order an organization to change a practice and to pay damages to the individual. (see the Regulatory Impact Analysis Statement that accompanied the Regulations, Appendix A of the Respondent's Record, tab 7)
[32] In his Memorandum of Fact and Law, the Applicant submitted that no deference whatsoever should be given to the PCC's findings.
[33] While it is true that he is granted no statutory authority to impose his conclusions or recommendations, I believe that as a statutorily created administrator with specialized expertise, the PCC is entitled to some deference with respect to decisions clearly within his jurisdiction.
1. Does TELUS have valid consent under the PIPEDA to publish its customers' personal information in TELUS directories?
[34] The Respondent argues that the Applicant has tendered no evidence of TELUS collecting, using or disclosing any of his personal information without his consent, and therefore that he lacks standing. However, in accordance with subsection 14(1) of the PIPEDA, as stated above, any complainant may bring an application as long as its criteria are met.
[35] Furthermore, the Applicant has strongly demonstrated that he reluctantly complied with the requests from TELUS. Indeed, if he wanted to benefit from a NPNS, he had no choice.
[36] Therefore, compliance with the TELUS' requests should not jeopardize the Applicant's personal standing in this case.
[37] In my view, the Applicant has standing to bring this application.
[38] In his affidavit, Jim Brooks, TELUS Vice-President, Business Transformation, informs us of the procedure that is followed when a customer subscribes to a new telephone line. TELUS customer service representatives are instructed to indicate to customers that the telephone line includes a listing in TELUS directories; customers are asked how they would like their personal information to appear in the directories; and the representatives discuss privacy concerns and listing options with the customer if the customer expresses an interest in not being published. New customers also receive a welcoming letter with an accompanying brochure entitled "Our privacy Commitment to You". The brochure sets out, inter alia, the purposes for which TELUS collects, uses, and discloses customers' personal information. It also advises customers of their right to be de-listed.
[39] The White Pages specifically detail how TELUS uses personal information and the various privacy oriented service options provided by TELUS. They also indicate to whom TELUS discloses information and how a customer's information can be used. There are also specific instructions on how customers can withdraw their consent, verify or change their personal information at any time.
[40] Furthermore, TELUS maintains a toll free number which is dedicated to providing information to customers who wish to discuss privacy issues. TELUS also maintains a website where customers can obtain information about its privacy practices. In addition to those services, TELUS employs a full-time Privacy Officer who is accountable for privacy policies and practices.
[41] It is a long-standing and well established practice of telephone companies to include directory listings as part of residential telephone service. Thus, in addition to being notified of the fact by TELUS, customers have a reasonable expectation that unless they subscribe to NPNS, their listing information will be published in the phone directory. In obtaining consent, such reasonable expectation is a relevant consideration, as stated in clause 4.3.5 of Schedule 1 of the PIPEDA.
[42] Furthermore, the CRTC, in its Report to the Governor in Council on Directory Subscriber Listings and on Unlisted Number Service dated December 23, 1996, has expressly recognized:
The Commission considers that, as a result of this long-established practice, subscribers currently expect that, unless they request an unlisted number, their telephone numbers will be published in the telephone companies' directories and will be available through directory assistance. In the Commission's view, subscribers can be considered to have consented to this use if they initiate service without requesting an unlisted number.
(Respondent's Record, tab 1, page 110)
[43] I would like to emphasize the relevance of subsection 5(3) of the PIPEDA. When applied to the case at bar, it states that TELUS may collect, use or disclose personal information only for purposes that a reasonable person would consider appropriate in the circumstances. The Applicant has failed to convince me that TELUS was in violation of such provision.
[44] Not to mention that paragraphs 7(1)(d), 7(2)(c.1) and 7(3)(h.1) of the PIPEDA, combined with paragraph 1(a) of the Regulations Specifying Publicly Available Information [the Regulations], expressly provide that an organization may collect, use or disclose personal information without the knowledge or consent of the individual if the information is publicly available.
[45] The Regulatory Impact Analysis Statement that accompanied the Regulations includes the following statement:
...
... As a rule, individuals are able to decide for themselves with whom they will share personal information and under what circumstances. However, some personal information enters into the public sphere through a variety of channels, often include personal information that appears in telephone or other directories, ... This personal information is made public for a specific and primary purpose, e.g. individuals allow their name, address and telephone number to appear in the telephone or other directories to enable others to contact them for personal reasons, to enable potential clients to reach them in their professional capacity or to enable others to verify their title, membership or professional qualifications. ...
...
The Regulation is based on a recognition that some personal information is publicly available for a legitimate primary purpose, often with the individual's tacit agreement (e.g., the telephone directory, announcements). In these circumstances, it is reasonable to allow organizations to collect, use and disclose this information without adding the requirement to obtain consent. To require an organization to obtain consent to use this information for its primary purpose would not contribute to the protection of the individual's privacy, would add to the organization's costs and could frustrate some public policy purpose. However, it is also reasonable to insist that any purpose other than the primary one should be subject to the consent requirement. ...
...
Telephone Directories
One association pointed out that the exception for the telephone directory is based on the individual's ability to refuse to appear in the directory but that the refusal can only be exercised by paying for an unlisted number (this is a condition set by several of the telephone companies). They argue that this fee was an economic barrier to lower income people who may not wish to be listed but who cannot afford to exercise their right to refuse and suggested adding "without incurring any cost for such refusal". While this point may have validity from an access to services perspective, the use of fees is not specifically a protection of privacy issue.
An organization questioned whether the term "telephone directory" included information from Discovery Assistance or from online telephone directories that also provide the individual with a right of refusal to appear in the directory. The intention is to include such directories in the Regulation.
[46] Even if the parties have different views on what weight should be given to such "Impact Analysis Statement", nevertheless those are a strong indication of the purpose of such regulations.
[47] As such, I believe that once a TELUS representative has asked a new subscriber how he or she would like his or her listing information to appear in the telephone directory, it is open to that subscriber to enquire on the options available to him or her. If the privacy of such information is fundamental or simply desired by a subscriber, it is his or her responsibility to educate him or herself, either by asking the representative or through the various tools which have been put at the public's disposal by TELUS.
[48] Therefore, it is my conclusion that TELUS has valid consent under the PIPEDA to publish its customers' personal information in TELUS directories.
2. Does the PIPEDA restrict TELUS from charging a fee for the provision of NPNS?
[49] Through CRTC Telecom Decision 94-109, the CRTC has expressly recognized the social utility of the directory and has found that, inter alia, the provision of directories forms an essential part of, and significantly enhances the value of, the company's basic telephone service.
[50] Similarly, through the Regulations as well as the Regulatory Impact Analysis Statement, the federal government has expressly recognized that directories serve legitimate purposes, of which the primary is to provide telephone network users with easy and accurate identification of subscriber telephone numbers.
[51] Therefore, and as justifiably stated by Mr Brooks, if there was no fee for NPNS, the demand for the service would increase causing a corresponding decrease in the comprehensiveness, and thus in the utility, of the directories.
[52] As stated earlier, when customers subscribe for NPNS, their listing information must be manually flagged and their accounts require ongoing extra security and special handling, thereby resulting in some additional costs to TELUS.
[53] Even more important is the fact that the issue of setting rates for NPNS with regard to privacy concerns has been resolved by the CRTC. Indeed, as previously mentioned, in June of 1996, the CRTC was ordered by the Governor in Council to report on the matter of directory listings, including the appropriate level of privacy protection that should be accorded to subscriber listings and to provide an evaluation of NPNS. On February 4, 1998, the CRTC issued its decision on rates for unlisted service in Telecom Order CRTC 98-109. Also noteworthy, is the fact that at paragraph 13 of the above order, the CRTC specifically addressed the argument of the privacy advocates as to the fact that there should be no charge for the service.
[54] In Telecom Order CRTC 98-109, the CRTC struck a balance among the various competing interests:
22. The Commission encourages the telephone companies to provide as much flexibility as possible, but considers that affording subscribers complete flexibility as to how their listings appear in directories and in directory assistance databases could undermine the usefulness of the directory and complicate the provision of directory assistance.
...
31. Based on the information filed in this proceeding, the Commission considers that to set a cost-based rate would fail to take adequate account of considerations such as the usefulness of a reasonably complete directory and the revenue impact of reduced rates.
32. However, given increasing personal privacy concerns, the Commission also considers it inappropriate that monthly rates for unlisted number service for residence subscribers remain at levels that were established in the past with a view to maximizing revenues available to subsidize basic residential service.
33. Taking into account the increasing privacy concerns, as well as factors such as the revenue impact of reduced rates for unlisted numbers service and the contribution that readily available subscriber listing information makes to the usefulness of the network, the Commission considers it appropriate that the telephone companies provide an unlisted number service at a rate that does not exceed $2 per month for residence subscribers.
[55] As to the Applicant's suggestion that TELUS unilaterally change its tariff for NPNS to reduce the rate to nil, it would have to file any proposed amendments with the CRTC for its approval. In his affidavit, Mr. Brooks contends that a shift to a nil rate, or any other decrease from the current rates for NPNS, would have two principal impacts:
1) there would be an associated reduction in revenues which TELUS would seek to off-set by increases to rates for other services; and
2) there would be an increase in demand for NPNS which would compromise the CRTC's stated goal of preserving the benefit to society of having a comprehensive directory.
[56] As the CRTC is charged by subsection 48(1) of the Telecommunications Act with the jurisdiction to ensure that the requirements of that Act are complied with; as section 27 of that Act, inter alia, requires that every rate charged for a telecommunications service be just and reasonable and; as the courts grant significant deference to the decisions that fall within the CRTC's area of expertise; I find that in accordance with Telecom Order CRTC 98-109, the PIPEDA does not restrict TELUS from charging a reasonable fee for the provision of NPNS.
[57] As stated by the Respondent, "given that the CRTC's special expertise and mandate in the telecommunications sector requires the CRTC to balance social and economic imperatives and to actively regulate the telecommunications sector, the only reasonable conclusion is that Parliament intended that any privacy matter that has any effect on the rates, tariffs and regulations imposed by the CRTC remain in the exclusive jurisdiction of the CRTC."
[58] In his Reply Memorandum, the Applicant states that the fundamental issue in the case at bar is whether TELUS' practice of charging a fee for not publishing a customer's listing information contravenes the specific provisions of the PIPEDA and that furthermore, that issue has never been considered by the CRTC, in light of the fact that the PIPEDA had not been enacted when the CRTC issued Telecom Order CRTC 98-109. One cannot disagree with such statement.
[59] I however find that the enactment of the PIPEDA in no way changed the state of things, thereby making it unnecessary for TELUS to submit new or revised tariff pages to the CRTC for approval.
[60] In its part, the Respondent strongly suggests that this Court has no jurisdiction over the fee issue, as it is a matter within the exclusive jurisdiction of the CRTC. The Respondent bases its argument on the decisions of Weber v. Ontario Hydro [1995] 2 S.C.R. 929, Gendron v. Public Service Alliance of Canada, [1990] 1 S.C.R. 1298, and L'Écuyer c. Aéroports de Montréal, [2003] A.C.F. no 752, 2003 CFPI 573.
[61] I agree with the Respondent's argument.
[62] The Applicant's "five reasons why charging a fee for an unlisted number contravenes PIPEDA" has entirely failed to convince me of such a violation. After a careful and thorough reading of the PIPEDA, I find that there is no express nor implied restriction on TELUS from charging a reasonable fee for the provision of NPNS.
[63] In my view, the Applicant has failed to convince the Court that his application was well-founded.
ORDER
[64] Therefore, this application is dismissed with costs in favour of the Respondent.
(Sgd.) "Pierre Blais"
J.F.C.C.
SCHEDULE "A"
RELEVANT LEGISLATION
Section 2 of the PIPEDA defines the following terms:
| "commercial activity" means any particular transaction, act or conduct or any regular course of conduct that is of a commercial character, including the selling, bartering or leasing of donor, membership or other fundraising lists. |
|
« _activité commerciale_ » Toute activité régulière ainsi que tout acte isolé qui revêtent un caractère commercial de par leur nature, y compris la vente, le troc ou la location de listes de donneurs, d'adhésion ou de collecte de fonds.
|
|
|
|
|
| "personal information" means information about an identifiable individual, but does not include the name, title or business address or telephone number of an employee of an organization.
|
|
« _renseignement personnel_ » Tout renseignement concernant un individu identifiable, à l'exclusion du nom et du titre d'un employé d'une organisation et des adresse et numéro de téléphone de son lieu de travail. |
|
|
|
|
Section 3 determines the purpose of the PIPEDA:
| 3. The purpose of this Part is to establish, in an era in which technology increasingly facilitates the circulation and exchange of information, rules to govern the collection, use and disclosure of personal information in a manner that recognizes the right of privacy of individuals with respect to their personal information and the need of organizations to collect, use or disclose personal information for purposes that a reasonable person would consider appropriate in the circumstances.
[emphasis added] |
|
3. La présente partie a pour objet de fixer, dans une ère où la technologie facilite de plus en plus la circulation et l'échange de renseignements, des règles régissant la collecte, l'utilisation et la communication de renseignements personnels d'une manière qui tient compte du droit des individus à la vie privée à l'égard des renseignements personnels qui les concernent et du besoin des organisations de recueillir, d'utiliser ou de communiquer des renseignements personnels à des fins qu'une personne raisonnable estimerait acceptables dans les circonstances.
[nos italiques] |
|
|
|
|
Subsection 4(1) of the PIPEDA refers to the application of the Act:
| 4. (1) This Part applies to every organization in respect of personal information that
(a) the organization collects, uses or discloses in the course of commercial activities; or
(b) is about an employee of the organization and that the organization collects, uses or discloses in connection with the operation of a federal work, undertaking or business.
|
|
4. (1) La présente partie s'applique à toute organisation à l'égard des renseignements personnels_:
a) soit qu'elle recueille, utilise ou communique dans le cadre d'activités commerciales;
b) soit qui concernent un de ses employés et qu'elle recueille, utilise ou communique dans le cadre d'une entreprise fédérale.
|
|
|
|
|
Section 5 of the PIPEDA relates to the compliance with the obligations of Schedule 1:
| 5(1) Subject to sections 6 to 9, every organization shall comply with the obligations set out in Schedule 1.
5(2) The word "should", when used in Schedule 1, indicates a recommendation and does not impose an obligation.
5(3) An organization may collect, use or disclose personal information only for purposes that a reasonable person would consider are appropriate in the circumstances.
[emphasis added] |
|
5(1) Sous réserve des articles 6 à 9, toute organisation doit se conformer aux obligations énoncées dans l'annexe 1.
5(2) L'emploi du conditionnel dans l'annexe 1 indique qu'il s'agit d'une recommandation et non d'une obligation.
5(3) L'organisation ne peut recueillir, utiliser ou communiquer des renseignements personnels qu'à des fins qu'une personne raisonnable estimerait acceptables dans les circonstances.
[nos italiques] |
|
|
|
|
Section 7 of the PIPEDA refers to the collection, use, or disclosure of personal information without the individual's knowledge or consent:
| 7. (1) For the purpose of clause 4.3 of Schedule 1, and despite the note that accompanies that clause, an organization may collect personal information without the knowledge or consent of the individual only if
(a) the collection is clearly in the interests of the individual and consent cannot be obtained in a timely way;
(b) it is reasonable to expect that the collection with the knowledge or consent of the individual would compromise the availability or the accuracy of the information and the collection is reasonable for purposes related to investigating a breach of an agreement or a contravention of the laws of Canada or a province;
(c) the collection is solely for journalistic, artistic or literary purposes; or
(d) the information is publicly available and is specified by the regulations.
7(2) For the purpose of clause 4.3 of Schedule 1, and despite the note that accompanies that clause, an organization may, without the knowledge or consent of the individual, use personal information only if
(a) in the course of its activities, the organization becomes aware of information that it has reasonable grounds to believe could be useful in the investigation of a contravention of the laws of Canada, a province or a foreign jurisdiction that has been, is being or is about to be committed, and the information is used for the purpose of investigating that contravention;
(b) it is used for the purpose of acting in respect of an emergency that threatens the life, health or security of an individual;
(c) it is used for statistical, or scholarly study or research, purposes that cannot be achieved without using the information, the information is used in a manner that will ensure its confidentiality, it is impracticable to obtain consent and the organization informs the Commissioner of the use before the information is used;
(c.1) it is publicly available and is specified by the regulations; or
(d) it was collected under paragraph (1)(a) or (b).
7(3) For the purpose of clause 4.3 of Schedule 1, and despite the note that accompanies that clause, an organization may disclose personal information without the knowledge or consent of the individual only if the disclosure is
(a) made to, in the Province of Quebec, an advocate or notary or, in any other province, a barrister or solicitor who is representing the organization;
(b) for the purpose of collecting a debt owed by the individual to the organization;
(c) required to comply with a subpoena or warrant issued or an order made by a court, person or body with jurisdiction to compel the production of information, or to comply with rules of court relating to the production of records;
(c.1) made to a government institution or part of a government institution that has made a request for the information, identified its lawful authority to obtain the information and indicated that (i) it suspects that the information relates to national security, the defence of Canada or the conduct of international affairs, (ii) the disclosure is requested for the purpose of enforcing any law of Canada, a province or a foreign jurisdiction, carrying out an investigation relating to the enforcement of any such law or gathering intelligence for the purpose of enforcing any such law, or (iii) the disclosure is requested for the purpose of administering any law of Canada or a province;
(c.2) made to the government institution mentioned in section 7 of the Proceeds of Crime (Money Laundering) and Terrorist Financing Act as required by that section;
*(c.2) made to the government institution mentioned in section 7 of the Proceeds of Crime (Money Laundering) Act as required by that section;
*[Note: Paragraph 7(3)(c.2), as enacted by paragraph 97(1)(a) of chapter 17 of the Statutes of Canada, 2000, will be repealed at a later date.]
(d) made on the initiative of the organization to an investigative body, a government institution or a part of a government institution and the organization (i) has reasonable grounds to believe that the information relates to a breach of an agreement or a contravention of the laws of Canada, a province or a foreign jurisdiction that has been, is being or is about to be committed, or (ii) suspects that the information relates to national security, the defence of Canada or the conduct of international affairs;
(e) made to a person who needs the information because of an emergency that threatens the life, health or security of an individual and, if the individual whom the information is about is alive, the organization informs that individual in writing without delay of the disclosure;
(f) for statistical, or scholarly study or research, purposes that cannot be achieved without disclosing the information, it is impracticable to obtain consent and the organization informs the Commissioner of the disclosure before the information is disclosed;
(g) made to an institution whose functions include the conservation of records of historic or archival importance, and the disclosure is made for the purpose of such conservation;
(h) made after the earlier of (i) one hundred years after the record containing the information was created, and (ii) twenty years after the death of the individual whom the information is about;
(h.1) of information that is publicly available and is specified by the regulations;
(h.2) made by an investigative body and the disclosure is reasonable for purposes related to investigating a breach of an agreement or a contravention of the laws of Canada or a province; or (i) required by law.
7(4) Despite clause 4.5 of Schedule 1, an organization may use personal information for purposes other than those for which it was collected in any of the circumstances set out in subsection (2).
7(5) Despite clause 4.5 of Schedule 1, an organization may disclose personal information for purposes other than those for which it was collected in any of the circumstances set out in paragraphs (3)(a) to (h.2).
[emphasis added] |
|
7. (1) Pour l'application de l'article 4.3 de l'annexe 1 et malgré la note afférente, l'organisation ne peut recueillir de renseignement personnel à l'insu de l'intéressé et sans son consentement que dans les cas suivants_:
a) la collecte du renseignement est manifestement dans l'intérêt de l'intéressé et le consentement ne peut être obtenu auprès de celui-ci en temps opportun;
b) il est raisonnable de s'attendre à ce que la collecte effectuée au su ou avec le consentement de l'intéressé puisse compromettre l'exactitude du renseignement ou l'accès à celui-ci, et la collecte est raisonnable à des fins liées à une enquête sur la violation d'un accord ou la contravention du droit fédéral ou provincial;
c) la collecte est faite uniquement à des fins journalistiques, artistiques ou littéraires;
d) il s'agit d'un renseignement réglementaire auquel le public a accès.
7(2) Pour l'application de l'article 4.3 de l'annexe 1 et malgré la note afférente, l'organisation ne peut utiliser de renseignement personnel à l'insu de l'intéressé et sans son consentement que dans les cas suivants_:
a) dans le cadre de ses activités, l'organisation découvre l'existence d'un renseignement dont elle a des motifs raisonnables de croire qu'il pourrait être utile à une enquête sur une contravention au droit fédéral, provincial ou étranger qui a été commise ou est en train ou sur le point de l'être, et l'utilisation est faite aux fins d'enquête;
b) l'utilisation est faite pour répondre à une situation d'urgence mettant en danger la vie, la santé ou la sécurité de tout individu;
c) l'utilisation est faite à des fins statistiques ou à des fins d'étude ou de recherche érudites, ces fins ne peuvent être réalisées sans que le renseignement soit utilisé, celui-ci est utilisé d'une manière qui en assure le caractère confidentiel, le consentement est pratiquement impossible à obtenir et l'organisation informe le commissaire de l'utilisation avant de la faire;
c.1) il s'agit d'un renseignement réglementaire auquel le public a accès;
d) le renseignement a été recueilli au titre des alinéas (1)a) ou b).
7(3) Pour l'application de l'article 4.3 de l'annexe 1 et malgré la note afférente, l'organisation ne peut communiquer de renseignement personnel à l'insu de l'intéressé et sans son consentement que dans les cas suivants_:
a) la communication est faite à un avocat - dans la province de Québec, à un avocat ou à un notaire - qui représente l'organisation;
b) elle est faite en vue du recouvrement d'une créance que celle-ci a contre l'intéressé;
c) elle est exigée par assignation, mandat ou ordonnance d'un tribunal, d'une personne ou d'un organisme ayant le pouvoir de contraindre à la production de renseignements ou exigée par des règles de procédure se rapportant à la production de documents;
c.1) elle est faite à une institution gouvernementale - ou à une subdivision d'une telle institution - qui a demandé à obtenir le renseignement en mentionnant la source de l'autorité légitime étayant son droit de l'obtenir et le fait, selon le cas_: (i) qu'elle soupçonne que le renseignement est afférent à la sécurité nationale, à la défense du Canada ou à la conduite des affaires internationales, (ii) que la communication est demandée aux fins du contrôle d'application du droit canadien, provincial ou étranger, de la tenue d'enquêtes liées à ce contrôle d'application ou de la collecte de renseignements en matière de sécurité en vue de ce contrôle d'application, (iii) qu'elle est demandée pour l'application du droit canadien ou provincial;
c.2) elle est faite au titre de l'article 7 de la Loi sur le recyclage des produits de la criminalité et le financement des activités terroristes à l'institution gouvernementale mentionnée à cet article;
*c.2) elle est faite au titre de l'article 7 de la Loi sur le recyclage des produits de la criminalité à l'institution gouvernementale mentionnée à cet article;
*[Note_: L'alinéa 7(3)c.2), édicté par l'alinéa 97(1)a) du chapitre 17 des Lois du Canada (2000), sera abrogé ultérieurement.]
d) elle est faite, à l'initiative de l'organisation, à un organisme d'enquête, une institution gouvernementale ou une subdivision d'une telle institution et l'organisation, selon le cas, a des motifs raisonnables de croire que le renseignement est afférent à la violation d'un accord ou à une contravention au droit fédéral, provincial ou étranger qui a été commise ou est en train ou sur le point de l'être ou soupçonne que le renseignement est afférent à la sécurité nationale, à la défense du Canada ou à la conduite des affaires internationales;
e) elle est faite à toute personne qui a besoin du renseignement en raison d'une situation d'urgence mettant en danger la vie, la santé ou la sécurité de toute personne et, dans le cas où la personne visée par le renseignement est vivante, l'organisation en informe par écrit et sans délai cette dernière;
f) elle est faite à des fins statistiques ou à des fins d'étude ou de recherche érudites, ces fins ne peuvent être réalisées sans que le renseignement soit communiqué, le consentement est pratiquement impossible à obtenir et l'organisation informe le commissaire de la communication avant de la faire;
g) elle est faite à une institution dont les attributions comprennent la conservation de documents ayant une importance historique ou archivistique, en vue d'une telle conservation;
h) elle est faite cent ans ou plus après la constitution du document contenant le renseignement ou, en cas de décès de l'intéressé, vingt ans ou plus après le décès, dans la limite de cent ans;
h.1) il s'agit d'un renseignement réglementaire auquel le public a accès;
h.2) elle est faite par un organisme d'enquête et est raisonnable à des fins liées à une enquête sur la violation d'un accord ou la contravention du droit fédéral ou provincial; i) elle est exigée par la loi.
7(4) Malgré l'article 4.5 de l'annexe 1, l'organisation peut, dans les cas visés au paragraphe (2), utiliser un renseignement personnel à des fins autres que celles auxquelles il a été recueilli.
7(5) Malgré l'article 4.5 de l'annexe 1, l'organisation peut, dans les cas visés aux alinéas (3)a) à h.2), communiquer un renseignement personnel à des fins autres que celles auxquelles il a été recueilli.
[nos italiques] |
|
|
|
|
Section 16 of the PIPEDA determines the possible remedies:
| 16. The Court may, in addition to any other remedies it may give,
(a) order an organization to correct its practices in order to comply with sections 5 to 10; (b) order an organization to publish a notice of any action taken or proposed to be taken to correct its practices, whether or not ordered to correct them under paragraph (a); and
(c) award damages to the complainant, including damages for any humiliation that the complainant has suffered.
|
|
16. La Cour peut, en sus de toute autre réparation qu'elle accorde_:
a) ordonner à l'organisation de revoir ses pratiques de façon à se conformer aux articles 5 à 10; b) lui ordonner de publier un avis énonçant les mesures prises ou envisagées pour corriger ses pratiques, que ces dernières aient ou non fait l'objet d'une ordonnance visée à l'alinéa a);
c) accorder au plaignant des dommages-intérêts, notamment en réparation de l'humiliation subie. |
|
|
|
|
Section 17 of the PIPEDA states that, inter alia, an application under section 14 will be heard and determined in a summary way:
| 17. (1) An application made under section 14 or 15 shall be heard and determined without delay and in a summary way unless the Court considers it inappropriate to do so.
|
|
17. (1) Le recours prévu aux articles 14 ou 15 est entendu et jugé sans délai et selon une procédure sommaire, à moins que la Cour ne l'estime contre-indiqué. |
|
|
|
|
Schedule 1 (Section 5) - Principle Set Out in the National Standard of Canada Entitled Model Code for the Protection of Personal Information, CAN/CSA-Q830-96:
Clause 4.3 refers to the principle of consent:
| 4.3 The knowledge and consent of the individual are required for the collection, use, or disclosure of personal information, except where inappropriate.
4.3.1 Consent is required for the collection of personal information and the subsequent use or disclosure of this information. Typically, an organization will seek consent for the use or disclosure of the information at the time of collection. In certain circumstances, consent with respect to use or disclosure may be sought after the information has been collected but before use (for example, when an organization wants to use information for a purpose not previously identified).
4.3.2 The principle requires "knowledge and consent". Organizations shall make a reasonable effort to ensure that the individual is advised of the purposes for which the information will be used. To make the consent meaningful, the purposes must be stated in such a manner that the individual can reasonably understand how the information will be used or disclosed.
4.3.3 An organization shall not, as a condition of the supply of a product or service, require an individual to consent to the collection, use, or disclosure of information beyond that required to fulfil the explicitly specified, and legitimate purposes.
4.3.5 In obtaining consent, the reasonable expectations of the individual are also relevant. For example, an individual buying a subscription to a magazine should reasonably expect that the organization, in addition to using the individual's name and address for mailing and billing purposes, would also contact the person to solicit the renewal of the subscription. In this case, the organization can assume that the individual's request constitutes consent for specific purposes. On the other hand, an individual would not reasonably expect that personal information given to a health-care professional would be given to a company selling health-care products, unless consent were obtained. Consent shall not be obtained through deception.
4.3.6 The way in which an organization seeks consent may vary, depending on the circumstances and the type of information collected. An organization should generally seek express consent when the information is likely to be considered sensitive. Implied consent would generally be appropriate when the information is less sensitive. Consent can also be given by an authorized representative (such as a legal guardian or a person having power of attorney).
4.3.7 Individuals can give consent in many ways. For example: (a) an application form may be used to seek consent, collect information, and inform the individual of the use that will be made of the information. By completing and signing the form, the individual is giving consent to the collection and the specified uses; (b) a checkoff box may be used to allow individuals to request that their names and addresses not be given to other organizations. Individuals who do not check the box are assumed to consent to the transfer of this information to third parties; (c) consent may be given orally when information is collected over the telephone; or (d) consent may be given at the time that individuals use a product or service.
4.3.8 An individual may withdraw consent at any time, subject to legal or contractual restrictions and reasonable notice. The organization shall inform the individual of the implications of such withdrawal.
[emphasis added] |
|
4.3 Toute personne doit être informée de toute collecte, utilisation ou communication de renseignements personnels qui la concernent et y consentir, à moins qu'il ne soit pas approprié de le faire.
4.3.1 Il faut obtenir le consentement de la personne concernée avant de recueillir des renseignements personnels à son sujet et d'utiliser ou de communiquer les renseignements recueillis. Généralement, une organisation obtient le consentement des personnes concernées relativement à l'utilisation et à la communication des renseignements personnels au moment de la collecte. Dans certains cas, une organisation peut obtenir le consentement concernant l'utilisation ou la communication des renseignements après avoir recueilli ces renseignements, mais avant de s'en servir, par exemple, quand elle veut les utiliser à des fins non précisées antérieurement.
4.3.2 Suivant ce principe, il faut informer la personne au sujet de laquelle on recueille des renseignements et obtenir son consentement. Les organisations doivent faire un effort raisonnable pour s'assurer que la personne est informée des fins auxquelles les renseignements seront utilisés. Pour que le consentement soit valable, les fins doivent être énoncées de façon que la personne puisse raisonnablement comprendre de quelle manière les renseignements seront utilisés ou communiqués.
4.3.3 Une organisation ne peut pas, pour le motif qu'elle fournit un bien ou un service, exiger d'une personne qu'elle consente à la collecte, à l'utilisation ou à la communication de renseignements autres que ceux qui sont nécessaires pour réaliser les fins légitimes et explicitement indiquées.
4.3.5 Dans l'obtention du consentement, les attentes raisonnables de la personne sont aussi pertinentes. Par exemple, une personne qui s'abonne à un périodique devrait raisonnablement s'attendre à ce que l'entreprise, en plus de se servir de son nom et de son adresse à des fins de postage et de facturation, communique avec elle pour lui demander si elle désire que son abonnement soit renouvelé. Dans ce cas, l'organisation peut présumer que la demande de la personne constitue un consentement à ces fins précises. D'un autre côté, il n'est pas raisonnable qu'une personne s'attende à ce que les renseignements personnels qu'elle fournit à un professionnel de la santé soient donnés sans son consentement à une entreprise qui vend des produits de soins de santé. Le consentement ne doit pas être obtenu par un subterfuge.
4.3.6 La façon dont une organisation obtient le consentement peut varier selon les circonstances et la nature des renseignements recueillis. En général, l'organisation devrait chercher à obtenir un consentement explicite si les renseignements sont susceptibles d'être considérés comme sensibles. Lorsque les renseignements sont moins sensibles, un consentement implicite serait normalement jugé suffisant. Le consentement peut également être donné par un représentant autorisé (détenteur d'une procuration, tuteur).
4.3.7 Le consentement peut revêtir différentes formes, par exemple_: a) on peut se servir d'un formulaire de demande de renseignements pour obtenir le consentement, recueillir des renseignements et informer la personne de l'utilisation qui sera faite des renseignements. En remplissant le formulaire et en le signant, la personne donne son consentement à la collecte de renseignements et aux usages précisés; b) on peut prévoir une case où la personne pourra indiquer en cochant qu'elle refuse que ses nom et adresse soient communiqués à d'autres organisations. Si la personne ne coche pas la case, il sera présumé qu'elle consent à ce que les renseignements soient communiqués à des tiers; c) le consentement peut être donné de vive voix lorsque les renseignements sont recueillis par téléphone; ou d) le consentement peut être donné au moment où le produit ou le service est utilisé.
4.3.8 Une personne peut retirer son consentement en tout temps, sous réserve de restrictions prévues par une loi ou un contrat et d'un préavis raisonnable. L'organisation doit informer la personne des conséquences d'un tel retrait.
[nos italiques] |
|
|
|
|
Clause 4.5 relates to the principle of limiting use, disclosure, and retention:
| 4.5 Personal information shall not be used or disclosed for purposes other than those for which it was collected, except with the consent of the individual or as required by law. Personal information shall be retained only as long as necessary for the fulfilment of those purposes.
|
|
4.5 Les renseignements personnels ne doivent pas être utilisés ou communiqués à des fins autres que celles auxquelles ils ont été recueillis à moins que la personne concernée n'y consente ou que la loi ne l'exige. On ne doit conserver les renseignements personnels qu'aussi longtemps que nécessaire pour la réalisation des fins déterminées. |
|
|
|
|
Clause 4.9 refers to individual access:
| 4.9 Upon request, an individual shall be informed of the existence, use, and disclosure of his or her personal information and shall be given access to that information. An individual shall be able to challenge the accuracy and completeness of the information and have it amended as appropriate.
4.9.1 Upon request, an organization shall inform an individual whether or not the organization holds personal information about the individual. Organizations are encouraged to indicate the source of this information. The organization shall allow the individual access to this information. However, the organization may choose to make sensitive medical information available through a medical practitioner. In addition, the organization shall provide an account of the use that has been made or is being made of this information and an account of the third parties to which it has been disclosed.
4.9.3 In providing an account of third parties to which it has disclosed personal information about an individual, an organization should attempt to be as specific as possible. When it is not possible to provide a list of the organizations to which it has actually disclosed information about an individual, the organization shall provide a list of organizations to which it may have disclosed information about the individual.
|
|
4.9 Une organisation doit informer toute personne qui en fait la demande de l'existence de renseignements personnels qui la concernent, de l'usage qui en est fait et du fait qu'ils ont été communiqués à des tiers, et lui permettre de les consulter. Il sera aussi possible de contester l'exactitude et l'intégralité des renseignements et d'y faire apporter les corrections appropriées.
4.9.1 Une organisation doit informer la personne qui en fait la demande du fait qu'elle possède des renseignements personnels à son sujet, le cas échéant. Les organisations sont invitées à indiquer la source des renseignements. L'organisation doit permettre à la personne concernée de consulter ces renseignements. Dans le cas de renseignements médicaux sensibles, l'organisation peut préférer que ces renseignements soient communiqués par un médecin. En outre, l'organisation doit informer la personne concernée de l'usage qu'elle fait ou a fait des renseignements et des tiers à qui ils ont été communiqués.
4.9.3 L'organisation qui fournit le relevé des tiers à qui elle a communiqué des renseignements personnels au sujet d'une personne devrait être la plus précise possible. S'il lui est impossible de fournir une liste des organisations à qui elle a effectivement communiqué des renseignements au sujet d'une personne, l'organisation doit fournir une liste des organisations à qui elle pourrait avoir communiqué de tels renseignements. |
|
|
|
|
The Regulations Specifying Publicly Available Information follows provide:
| 1. The following information and classes of information are specified for the purposes of paragraphs 7(1)(d), (2)(c.1) and (3)(h.1) of the Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act:
(a) personal information consisting of the name, address and telephone number of a subscriber that appears in a telephone directory that is available to the public, where the subscriber can refuse to have the personal information appear in the directory; (b) personal information including the name, title, address and telephone number of an individual that appears in a professional or business directory, listing or notice, that is available to the public, where the collection, use and disclosure of the personal information relate directly to the purpose for which the information appears in the directory, listing or notice;
(c) personal information that appears in a registry collected under a statutory authority and to which a right of public access is authorized by law, where the collection, use and disclosure of the personal information relate directly to the purpose for which the information appears in the registry;
(d) personal information that appears in a record or document of a judicial or quasi-judicial body, that is available to the public, where the collection, use and disclosure of the personal information relate directly to the purpose for which the information appears in the record or document; and
(e) personal information that appears in a publication, including a magazine, book or newspaper, in printed or electronic form, that is available to the public, where the individual has provided the information.
2. These Regulations come into force on January 1, 2001.
|
|
1. Les renseignements et catégories de renseignements ci-après sont précisés pour l'application des alinéas 7(1)d), (2)c.1) et (3)h.1) de la Loi sur la protection des renseignements personnels et les documents électroniques :
a) les renseignements personnels - nom, adresse et numéro de téléphone des abonnés - figurant dans un annuaire téléphonique accessible au public, si l'abonné peut refuser que ces renseignements y figurent;
b) les renseignements personnels, y compris les nom, titre, adresse et numéro de téléphone, qui figurent dans un répertoire, listage ou avis à caractère professionnel ou d'affaires qui est accessible au public, si la collecte, l'utilisation et la communication de ces renseignements sont directement liées à la raison pour laquelle ils figurent dans le répertoire, listage ou avis;
c) les renseignements personnels qui figurent dans un registre, qui sont recueillis aux termes d'une autorisation législative et pour lesquels un droit d'accès public est autorisé par la loi, si la collecte, l'utilisation et la communication de ces renseignements sont directement liées à la raison pour laquelle ils figurent dans le registre;
d) les renseignements personnels qui figurent dans un dossier ou document d'un organisme judiciaire ou quasi judiciaire, qui est accessible au public, si la collecte, l'utilisation et la communication de ces renseignements sont directement liées à la raison pour laquelle ils figurent dans le dossier ou document;
e) les renseignements personnels qui figurent dans une publication, y compris les magazines, livres et journaux, sous forme imprimée ou électronique, qui est accessible au public, si l'intéressé a fourni les renseignements.
2. Le présent règlement entre en vigueur le 1er janvier 2001. |
|
|
|
|
FEDERAL COURT
NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD
DOCKET: T-1717-01
STYLE OF CAUSE: MATHEW ENGLANDER
Applicant
-and-
TELUS COMMUNICATIONS INC
Respondent
PLACE OF HEARING: Vancouver, B.C.
DATE OF HEARING: May 21 and 22, 2003
REASONS FOR ORDER : BLAIS J.
DATED: June 3, 2003
APPEARANCES:
Mr. Mathew Englander FOR APPLICANT
(on his own behalf)
Ms. Lisa A. Warren FOR RESPONDENT
SOLICITORS OF RECORD:
Mathew Englander FOR APPLICANT
(on his own behalf)
Farris, Vaughan, Wills & Murphy FOR RESPONDENT
Vancouver, B.C.