Intrusion Upon Seclusion
On January 18, 2012 Ontario’s highest court recognized a common law right to privacy by recognizing a right of action for “intrusion upon seclusion”. This is an important decision that could have a significant impact on Ontario’s legal landscape.
In the case which brought on this decision, one bank employee, Ms. Tsige, looked at the private bank records of a co-worker, Ms. Jones, who was having a common law relationship with her former husband. The court ordered Ms. Tsige to pay Ms. Jones $10,000 in damages.
To obtain damages for this new tort, a person must prove:
- the actions were intentional;
- the person/entity must have invaded, without lawful justification, the plaintiff’s private
affairs or concerns;
- a reasonable person would regard the invasion as highly offensive causing distress, humiliation or anguish
A person is not required to prove any actual loss.
Impact of this New Tort on Ontario Workplaces
It is too early to tell how this decision will impact employment practices in Ontario. At the very minimum, it should give employers pause before monitoring an employee’s private email unless they has the explicit right to do so.
We will be following this case closely, including whether it is appealed to the Supreme Court of Canada. If you have any questions about the right to privacy, please contact us at [email protected].
In February 2017, after a 40 day trial, an Ontario trial judge ordered the RCMP to pay Peter Merrifield $100,000 in general damages, $41,000 in special damages, and $825,000 in legal costs. In doing so, the trial judge recognized the tort of harassment. For my blog on...read more
Wrongful Dismissal Update: How to Reduce Termination Pay for Employees Who Earn Variable Compensation
Some employees receive a large percentage of their total compensation in variable compensation. A much litigated issue is whether the employer is required to pay variable compensation to a terminated employee during the applicable notice period and if so how is this...read more
An arbitrator who upholds a grievance can reinstate the employee, or order the employer to pay the employee damages. In a 2018 arbitration case, Arbitrator Surdykowksi decided how to calculate damages for an employee who was not reinstated. Facts Dr. Bernard was a...read more