The catalogueFederal (Canada)
Federal (Canada)

Federal (Canada) privacy & access decisions

Browse privacy decisions from Federal (Canada) — each with an AI-generated plain-language summary for every ruling.

1 decision matching
Federal (Canada)Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents ActWell-founded
Federal (Canada) flag
Dec 29, 2016PIPEDA findings #2016-013Indexed Jun 30, 2026

PIPEDA findings #2016-013: Company’s disclosure of information about a debt owed is not covered under exemption to consent

A sports facilities company

An individual complained that a sports facilities company disclosed his personal information, specifically details about an outstanding debt, to a related sports association on two occasions without his consent. The company did not deny the disclosures but argued they were made in response to direct questions and with an expectation of privacy. The OPC found that information about a debt owed by an identifiable individual is personal and sensitive, requiring consent for disclosure unless a specific exemption applies. The OPC determined that the disclosures were not for the purpose of collecting the debt, thus the exemption under paragraph 7(3)(b) of PIPEDA did not apply. The company's reliance on an 'expectation of privacy' or being asked directly was not a valid substitute for obtaining consent. The complaint was found to be well-founded.

Quick view

Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents ActWell-founded

PIPEDA findings #2016-013: Company’s disclosure of information about a debt owed is not covered under exemption to consent

Dec 29, 2016PIPEDA findings #2016-013
Adjudicator: Daniel Therrien
Plain-Language Summary

An individual complained that a sports facilities company disclosed his personal information, specifically details about an outstanding debt, to a related sports association on two occasions without his consent. The company did not deny the disclosures but argued they were made in response to direct questions and with an expectation of privacy. The OPC found that information about a debt owed by an identifiable individual is personal and sensitive, requiring consent for disclosure unless a specific exemption applies. The OPC determined that the disclosures were not for the purpose of collecting the debt, thus the exemption under paragraph 7(3)(b) of PIPEDA did not apply. The company's reliance on an 'expectation of privacy' or being asked directly was not a valid substitute for obtaining consent. The complaint was found to be well-founded.

Key Issues
  • Whether the disclosure of debt information without consent contravened Principle 4.3 of PIPEDA
  • Whether the disclosure was exempt from consent under paragraph 7(3)(b) of PIPEDA for debt collection purposes
  • Whether an 'expectation of privacy' or responding to a direct question constitutes a valid exception to consent requirements