March 28, 2019
Organizations subject to Canada’s Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act (PIPEDA) – those that collect, use or disclose personal information in the course of commercial activity in Canada – have seven new reasons to conduct an audit of privacy policies and practices ASAP. As of January 1, 2019, Canada’s Office of the Privacy Commissioner (and those of the provinces of Alberta and British Columbia) is applying new “Guidelines for obtaining meaningful consent”: seven new guiding principles to help organizations ensure they obtain “meaningful consent” from their customers for the collection, use and disclosure of personal information.
The Guidelines are more than mere suggestions: they include mandatory elements for such consent to satisfy the legal requirement of “meaningful” consent”. “Meaningful consent” essentially means that a person who is consenting to the collection, use or disclosure of their personal information has a solid understanding – before they decide to hand over any of their personal information – of what, why, how, when and where that personal information will be collected, used and disclosed. Canadians understand that today’s digital economy requires them to share their personal information with the organizations with which they do business. The Canadian Marketing Association’s (CMA) May 2018 study, “Data Privacy – What the Canadian consumer really thinks”, revealed that 66% of Canadians agree that disclosing personal information is “increasingly part of modern life”, and 35% think it’s “essential for the smooth running of modern society”. Yet, as the Privacy Commissioner succinctly summarized in the Office of the Privacy Commissioner’s 2016-17 Annual Report to Parliament on PIPEDA and the Privacy Act following consultations on which the Guidelines are based: Canadians want and expect better control over their personal information – and better protection of their privacy. Given knowledge is power and transparency is key, the new Guidelines aimed at ensuring consent is meaningful are an important step toward meeting the expectations of consumers in today’s digital world. The court has the last word on consent under PIPEDA. But if there’s litigation, judges will likely be influenced by the Guidelines; and if there’s an investigation of a complaint, implementing them will likely foster resolution with the Privacy Commissioner.
The new Guidelines mean organizations that collect, use or disclose personal information in the course of commercial activity are well-advised to, at the very least, conduct an audit of their consent practices and processes to ensure compliance with PIPEDA’s consent requirements. And with the new data breach response obligations now in effect, it means it’s likely most efficient to carry out a more fulsome review of all privacy practices and processes in that audit. Here are seven key steps to help organizations conduct an audit of their consent practices and processes for compliance with the Guidelines, and three reasons why the new Guidelines could mean it’s time for an audit of all privacy practices and processes.
7 Steps to Comply With “Meaningful Consent” Guidelines
Here are seven key steps to help you ensure you obtain “meaningful” consent from your customers.
1. Make privacy information accessible, available and digestible.
People must have the information they need to decide whether they want to share their personal information. So don’t bury that information in a privacy policy you’ve simply posted on your website that a customer might – or might not – read: it won’t ensure that you’ve obtained “meaningful consent”. Put it front and center, and emphasize the what, why, how and when of information collection, use and disclosure, and the possible risks of harm to which your customer is exposed if they give the consent. And ideally, give your customers the ability to control the amount of detail about the consent process that they want to receive and when.
2. Be user-friendly and intuitive.
Look at your process for obtaining consent through the eyes of your customers: is it user-friendly and intuitive? It needs to be; if it’s not, think of how to change it to make it so. It’s critical that you design consent practices and processes from the perspective of your customers – and remember that not all customers are the same. You need to have a deep and solid understanding of your customers and design consent practices and processes that speak to them depending on:
So get ahead of the curve: adopt innovative and creative ways for customers to give their consent – just before or at the time of collection, specific to the context, and suitable to the interface. For example, make sure that your customers can navigate your privacy policy and consent process as effectively from their smartphone as they can from their laptop or personal computer.
3. Give your customers a clear and easy choice.
When personal information is not necessary in order for you to provide your customers with your product or service, but you’re still asking for it, make it easy for them to say “yes” or “no” to sharing it with you.
4. Ask … then ask again (and again, if necessary).
Your customers might have agreed to give you their personal information to use (or share with others) for one purpose, but now you want to use (or share) it for another purpose. You’ll need to get fresh consent from your customer before you do this or before you make any other significant change to how you use or share their information.
5. Make sure that what you’re asking is reasonable.
Only collect, use or disclose personal information for purposes that a reasonable person would consider appropriate – in the circumstances. For example, don’t ask your customer for their credit card information as part of an account-opening process if all you really need is a name and email address.
6. Let people change their minds.
People have the right to change their minds and withdraw their consent to the use and disclosure of their personal information. Make sure your organization can accommodate this subject, of course, to legitimate reasons for information to be retained (for example, if there is a legal or contractual restriction on the deletion of data).
7. Know when implied consent is not enough.
There are times when “implied” (as opposed to “express”) agreement is enough for “meaningful consent” – and there are times when it’s not. When the agreement relates to the collection, use or disclosure of personal information that meets any of the following criteria, only express – and not implied – agreement is enough for “meaningful consent”:
3 Reasons the Guidelines Could Mean a Full Privacy Audit
The new Guidelines could also mean that, if you haven’t recently done so, it might make sense to broaden the scope of your audit to include all your privacy practices and processes. Here are three reasons why.
1. Privacy breach prevention is still crucial.
The Guidelines expressly note that consent isn’t a “silver bullet”. This is a crucial point organizations could easily overlook – at their peril: obtaining “meaningful consent” that meets the PIPEDA standard won’t save an organization that doesn’t have all its other privacy ducks in a row. In particular, it won’t save you from the Digital Privacy Act’s strict and onerous new mandatory privacy breach response requirements with respect to any data security safeguard breach. It’s prudent, if not essential, for all organizations to implement a cyber security risk mitigation plan to minimize the growing liability risks of suspected and actual data breaches (including compliance with the Digital Privacy Act). It also won’t save you from non-compliance with the myriad of other requirements of PIPEDA, or non-compliance with other privacy laws, like Canada’s Anti-Spam Legislation (CASL).
2. Privacy law is moving fast.
Privacy law is one of the most rapidly developing areas of the law. This means it can be tough for organizations to keep themselves – and their privacy practices and processes – up to speed, and makes regular privacy practice and process audits a must. In addition to new privacy laws (like the November 2018 Digital Privacy Act), decisions of Canadian courts often affect how all organizations do business, and courts are increasingly interpreting and setting legal parameters around privacy rights. The Guidelines specifically reference but two Supreme Court decisions (Royal Bank of Canada v. Trang and R. v. Spencer) of many that cumulatively demonstrate a trend to greater legal recognition – and protection – of Canadians’ privacy rights and expectations, including in: Internet files on work-issued laptop computers; data in a computer (including a “smart phone”); their online activities; basic cell phone contents; and co-owned personal computers.
3. Proof of privacy and consent compliance is a practical necessity.
The Guidelines caution organizations that they “should” be ready to demonstrate compliance with PIPEDA, and particularly its consent requirements. Theoretically, this is a “should”; practically, it’s a “must”. The clichéd legal advice is to “document, document, document”: it doesn’t just matter what you did, it matters what you can prove you did. If an organization faces an investigation by the Office of the Privacy Commissioner, its ability to prove it complied with privacy laws, including PIPEDA generally and its consent requirements (including the Guidelines) specifically, is imperative to its ability to respond in the investigation – and in the court of public opinion. This means you should document and maintain records of every step of every action you take to do the following – and should ensure your internal privacy practices and processes incorporate such documentation:
Please contact your McInnes Cooper lawyer or any member of the Privacy Law Team @ McInnes Cooper to discuss this topic or any other legal issue.
McInnes Cooper has prepared this document for information only; it is not intended to be legal advice. You should consult McInnes Cooper about your unique circumstances before acting on this information. McInnes Cooper excludes all liability for anything contained in this document and any use you make of it.
© McInnes Cooper, 2019. All rights reserved. McInnes Cooper owns the copyright in this document. You may reproduce and distribute this document in its entirety as long as you do not alter the form or the content and you give McInnes Cooper credit for it. You must obtain McInnes Cooper’s consent for any other form of reproduction or distribution. Email us at [email protected] to request our consent.
Oct 29, 2024
On September 9, 2024, a unanimous Federal Court of Appeal decided consent is to be determined on an objective standard. In an unusual move, in…
Aug 15, 2024
On June 21, 2024, the Supreme Court of Canada concluded – decisively - that the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms applies to protect the…
Jul 16, 2024
The Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS) has been looking for a new production order power; it’s on its way. The role of CSIS is to…
Jun 26, 2024
An increasing number of municipalities in Canada are using public video camera surveillance to promote public safety and help deter crimes like…
Jun 20, 2024
On April 30, 2024, the Ontario Divisional Court decided the victim of a serious cyber security incident was required to produce to privacy…
Apr 30, 2024
Bill C-63, if passed, will create the hotly anticipated Online Harms Act to regulate certain online platforms, create new Criminal Code of…
Mar 14, 2024
On March 1, 2024, the Supreme Court of Canada decided a police request for disclosure of an IP address is a “search” under section 8 of the…
Dec 15, 2023
Over four years after it began, the federal government still hasn’t finalized its overhaul of the private sector privacy law regime that both…
Sep 25, 2023
There’s a new scam on the web: Electronic Fund Transfer (EFT) scams. Most are familiar with established scams like phishing and ransomware and…
Jun 9, 2023
You arrive at the legendary Madison Square Garden to catch the Mariah Carey concert. It’s the big event of the trip – the reason you came to…
Apr 27, 2023
The benefits to employees, and often to employers, of remote work has made it a staple of today’s workplace. But the move to remote work…
Feb 1, 2023
On January 26, 2023, the Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada (OPC) released a report of findings requiring companies using targeted…
Jan 26, 2023
In November 2022, the Ontario Court of Appeal definitively decided an organization whose information systems are breached by a malicious third…
Jul 20, 2022
There’s a new privacy law coming to Canada. In June, the federal government introduced a complete overhaul of the privacy law regime that both…
Jun 30, 2022
On June 16, 2022, the federal government took a second shot at a complete overhaul of the private sector privacy law regime that both protects…
Dec 16, 2021
Updated October 7, 2024. The name of the game is to have a plan to mitigate the risk that a data breach will happen – but be ready when it…
Jan 26, 2021
Updated March 4, 2022. Privacy is critical to every business in every sector, including startups and growing businesses: to comply with the…
Nov 19, 2020
We updated this publication on June 30, 2022. NOTE: On June 16, 2022, the Government of Canada introduced Bill C-27: Digital Charter…
Feb 20, 2019
On February 14, 2019, the Supreme Court of Canada decided yet another criminal law decision that will likely have broader ramifications for…
Dec 19, 2018
On December 13, 2018, the Supreme Court of Canada confirmed that a third party can’t waive a person’s right to privacy or their rights under…
Aug 20, 2018
Updated July 8, 2024. Every organization subject to Canada’s Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act (PIPEDA, soon to…
Aug 3, 2018
Updated June 28, 2024. As of November 1, 2018, organizations in Canada subject to the Personal Information Protection and Electronic…
Jun 13, 2018
Updated September 26, 2024. Businesspeople (and their legal counsel) are on the road more than ever before: according to Statistics Canada,…
Jan 12, 2018
Whether a provincial court will grant police a “production order” under the Criminal Code of Canada requiring a non-Canadian company to…
Jun 28, 2017
On June 28, 2017, the Supreme Court of Canada confirmed a Canadian court can issue an interlocutory injunction (an order requiring an entity or…
Jun 23, 2017
On June 23, 2017, the Supreme Court of Canada decided that in a contest between the choice of forum clause in Facebook’s online terms of use…
Jun 7, 2017
On June 7, 2017, the federal government repealed the regulations that would have brought into effect the sections of Canada’s Anti Spam…
Feb 24, 2017
Updated January 29, 2024. Most organizations (72%) store the personal information of customers. employees, suppliers, vendors or partners,…
Jan 25, 2017
Doing business with the public sector creates an often overlooked – but very real – risk that the confidential information a business…
Nov 22, 2016
On November 17, 2016 the Supreme Court of Canada decided a mortgagee has the mortgagor’s implied consent to disclose its discharge statement…
Mar 24, 2016
When a business responds to a public sector Request for Proposal or Expression of Interest (both of which we’ll refer to as an RFP for these…
Jan 27, 2016
On January 21, 2016, the Ontario Superior Court of Justice dramatically expanded the scope of legal privacy protection – and the liability…
Mar 25, 2015
On March 3, 2015 Canada’s Privacy Commissioner determined that Health Canada breached privacy laws by mailing letters to over 40,000 Marihuana…
Mar 6, 2015
On March 5, 2015, the Canadian Radio and Television Commission (the CRTC, the main agency charged with administering and enforcing most of CASL)…
Dec 11, 2014
On December 11, 2014 the Supreme Court of Canada continued its trend to recognize privacy rights – and develop the law to protect them –…
Dec 11, 2014
On January 15, 2015, the software provisions of Canada’s Anti-Spam Legislation (CASL) will take effect. CASL’s anti-spam sections, touted…
Dec 1, 2014
The construction industry - project owners, contractors, subcontractors and trades - might be relaxing, ignoring the hype around Canada’s…
Oct 14, 2014
CASL’s anti-spam sections came into force on July 1, 2014. Every organization that CASL affects should now be complying with it – and their…
Aug 1, 2014
Most Canadians have heard about Canada’s Anti-Spam Legislation (CASL): we’ve been bombarded with “CASL Compliant” emails asking us to…
Jun 16, 2014
On June 13, 2014 the Supreme Court of Canada decided that Canadians have a reasonable expectation of privacy in their online activities, and…
Jun 12, 2014
The countdown to CASL is almost over: there are only 13 business days until the anti-spam provisions of CASL – and most of the penalties for…
May 8, 2014
On July 1, 2014 – less than two months from now - the anti-spam sections of Canada’s Anti-Spam Legislation (CASL) take effect. Individuals…
Apr 15, 2014
The countdown to CASL is on: on July 1, 2014, the anti-spam sections of Canada’s Anti-Spam Legislation (“CASL”) take effect. Individuals…
Feb 28, 2014
On July 1, 2014, the anti-spam sections of Canada’s Anti-Spam Legislation (aka “CASL”) will take effect. CASL is: Broad. It applies…
Feb 28, 2014
On July 1, 2014, the anti-spam sections of Canada’s Anti-Spam Legislation (aka “CASL”) take effect. CASL will apply to just about every…
Nov 8, 2013
On November 7, 2013, the Supreme Court of Canda decided police require specific authorization in a search warrant to search the data in a…
Nov 28, 2012
On October 19, 2012 the Supreme Court of Canada (SCC) decided a teacher criminally charged with possession of child pornography and unauthorized…
Subscribe to McInnes Cooper to stay current with our leading insights on legal updates, trends, news, events, and services.