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 & resolved
Federal (Canada) flag
Oct 16, 2019PIPEDA Findings #2019-003Indexed Jun 30, 2026

PIPEDA Findings #2019-003: Investigation into authentication and transfer practices used during Loblaw gift card offering

Loblaw Companies Ltd.

The complainant alleged that Loblaw collected more personal information than necessary for its $25 gift card program and was concerned about data transfers to a US-based third party. Loblaw requested ID (utility bill or driver's license) from some registrants to verify eligibility and prevent fraud, but initially failed to specify that only name and address were needed and other information could be redacted. The OPC found that Loblaw initially over-collected information under Principle 4.4, but this issue was resolved when Loblaw clarified its requirements. Regarding the cross-border transfer of data to a US Program Administrator, the OPC found that Loblaw had sufficient contractual safeguards in place to ensure a comparable level of protection (Principle 4.1.3) and was transparent about these transfers (Principle 4.8). No additional consent was required for the transfer of name and address information, as it was for the original purpose. The complaint was found well-founded and resolved for over-collection, and not well-founded for the data transfer issues.

Quick view

Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents ActWell-founded & resolved

PIPEDA Findings #2019-003: Investigation into authentication and transfer practices used during Loblaw gift card offering

Oct 16, 2019PIPEDA Findings #2019-003
Adjudicator: Daniel Therrien
Plain-Language Summary

The complainant alleged that Loblaw collected more personal information than necessary for its $25 gift card program and was concerned about data transfers to a US-based third party. Loblaw requested ID (utility bill or driver's license) from some registrants to verify eligibility and prevent fraud, but initially failed to specify that only name and address were needed and other information could be redacted. The OPC found that Loblaw initially over-collected information under Principle 4.4, but this issue was resolved when Loblaw clarified its requirements. Regarding the cross-border transfer of data to a US Program Administrator, the OPC found that Loblaw had sufficient contractual safeguards in place to ensure a comparable level of protection (Principle 4.1.3) and was transparent about these transfers (Principle 4.8). No additional consent was required for the transfer of name and address information, as it was for the original purpose. The complaint was found well-founded and resolved for over-collection, and not well-founded for the data transfer issues.

Key Issues
  • Whether Loblaw collected more personal information than necessary for the Loblaw Card Program (Principle 4.4)
  • Whether Loblaw ensured a comparable level of protection for personal information transferred to a third party for processing (Principle 4.1.3)
  • Whether Loblaw was required to obtain additional consent for the transfer of personal information for processing (Principle 4.3)
  • Whether Loblaw was sufficiently open and transparent about its cross-border data transfers (Principle 4.8)