While this case «was still in the Superior Court, there is a real possibility that future intrusion
upon seclusion cases will be before the Small Claims Court, which makes sense in view of the damages limits placed on such claims by the Court of Appeal,» he says.
Not exact matches
Although the employer was not named as a defendant in this
case, it is clear that an employer may be found liable for the tort of intrusion
upon seclusion.
«While not explicitly recognizing the tort in Trout Point Ltd. v. Handshoe, Hood J. cited Jones... and held that «in an appropriate
case in Nova Scotia there can be an award for invasion of privacy or as the Ontario Court of Appeal called it, the «intrusion
upon seclusion,»» wrote Pickup.
The
case has echoes of Jones v. Tsige, a landmark
case in which the Ontario Court of Appeal established the tort of intrusion
upon seclusion.
In this
case, the hospital is challenging application of the «tort of intrusion
upon seclusion» to health care privacy, which is comprehensively governed in Ontario by the Personal Health Information Protection Act.
Topic 1 - Ontario Privacy Laws for Lawyers Topic 2 - Overview of PIPEDA Topic 3 - Tort of intrusion
upon seclusion (Jones v Tsige) Topic 4 - New CASL legislation Topic 5 - Key privacy
cases for consideration
Examples of intrusion
upon seclusion in a cybersecurity scenario includes Evans vs. the Bank of Nova Scotia, a 2014
case where a bank employee was alleged to have provided customer information to others that resulted in fraud.
It should be noted that, in this
case, the employer did not dispute the breach of privacy, and as such it was assumed that the employer committed the tort of intrusion
upon seclusion and was responsible for the peace officer's actions.
The tort in that
case was called intrusion
upon seclusion, and basically applies only to nosy neighbour
cases.
In that
case, the Court of Appeal confirmed that a plaintiff must prove the following three things to establish the tort of intrusion
upon seclusion:
The
case establishes how, in the in the context of journalistic activity, the nascent tort of intrusion
upon seclusion will be considered.
To make out a
case for intrusion
upon seclusion, a claimant must show:
Case law on employer monitoring of online activity of employees is more limited, but the new tort of intrusion
upon seclusion may potentially be used in this context by an employee against an employer's activities.
These
cases have the potential to be successful on the basis of intrusion
upon seclusion without reliance on other heads of damages at all, which completely transforms the risk assessment for employers and administrators.
Tags: breach of confidence, confidential information, departing employee
cases, intrusion
upon seclusion, privacy tort, unfair competition
[39] Later in its reasons, when considering the desirability of recognizing the tort of intrusion
upon seclusion, the Court made a number of comments that are relevant to the issues in this
case, including the following:
If you Google in the search bar «intrusion
upon seclusion,» those search words provide a host of
cases and explanations.