The catalogue

Canadian privacy & access decisions

The comprehensive archive of federal, provincial, and territorial commissioner decisions — each with a plain-language summary.

2 decisions matching
Federal (Canada)Privacy ActNot well-founded
Federal (Canada) flag
May 17, 2016Indexed Jun 30, 2026

Canada Revenue Agency takes adequate measures to ensure personal information not moved to U.S.

Canada Revenue Agency (CRA)

A complainant raised concerns that the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) outsourced the storage of Canadian taxpayer information to Mobilshred Inc., which the complainant believed was a division of a US-based company, Recall. The complainant was concerned that this could make the personal information vulnerable to disclosure under the USA PATRIOT Act. The OPC investigated whether the CRA had properly safeguarded personal information from unauthorized disclosure. The CRA clarified that Mobilshred Inc. is a Canadian company, and the contract explicitly requires all physical records to remain in Canada. The OPC found that the CRA took appropriate steps to mitigate risks by ensuring all information remained in Canada and that Mobilshred Inc. is a Canadian entity. The complaint was found to be not well-founded.

Quick view

Privacy ActNot well-founded

Canada Revenue Agency takes adequate measures to ensure personal information not moved to U.S.

May 17, 2016
Adjudicator: Daniel Therrien
Plain-Language Summary

A complainant raised concerns that the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) outsourced the storage of Canadian taxpayer information to Mobilshred Inc., which the complainant believed was a division of a US-based company, Recall. The complainant was concerned that this could make the personal information vulnerable to disclosure under the USA PATRIOT Act. The OPC investigated whether the CRA had properly safeguarded personal information from unauthorized disclosure. The CRA clarified that Mobilshred Inc. is a Canadian company, and the contract explicitly requires all physical records to remain in Canada. The OPC found that the CRA took appropriate steps to mitigate risks by ensuring all information remained in Canada and that Mobilshred Inc. is a Canadian entity. The complaint was found to be not well-founded.

Key Issues
  • Whether the CRA properly safeguarded personal information entrusted to Mobilshred Inc. from unauthorized disclosure under the Privacy Act
  • Whether Canadian taxpayer information was vulnerable to disclosure to US authorities under the USA PATRIOT Act due to the contract with Mobilshred Inc.
  • Whether Mobilshred Inc. is a Canadian entity or affiliated with a US-based company
Federal (Canada)Privacy ActNot well-founded
Federal (Canada) flag
Feb 8, 2016Indexed Jun 30, 2026

Canada Post collection of online signatures for mail tracking draws complaint

Canada Post Corporation

A complaint was filed against Canada Post Corporation (CPC) regarding its collection, use, and disclosure of electronic signatures for parcel tracking. The complainant raised concerns about the clarity of information provided to addressees regarding their option to opt-out of having their signature displayed online, and the absence of labels on signature devices at a specific postal outlet. The investigation also examined the privacy and security controls of CPC's online tracking website. CPC argued that disclosure of signatures to senders was authorized under the Privacy Act and that it provided an opt-out option. The OPC found that the collection and disclosure of signatures for parcel tracking were consistent with the Act, but raised concerns about the adequacy of security controls for online signatures. CPC committed to implementing enhanced security measures.

Quick view

Privacy ActNot well-founded

Canada Post collection of online signatures for mail tracking draws complaint

Feb 8, 2016
Adjudicator: Daniel Therrien
Plain-Language Summary

A complaint was filed against Canada Post Corporation (CPC) regarding its collection, use, and disclosure of electronic signatures for parcel tracking. The complainant raised concerns about the clarity of information provided to addressees regarding their option to opt-out of having their signature displayed online, and the absence of labels on signature devices at a specific postal outlet. The investigation also examined the privacy and security controls of CPC's online tracking website. CPC argued that disclosure of signatures to senders was authorized under the Privacy Act and that it provided an opt-out option. The OPC found that the collection and disclosure of signatures for parcel tracking were consistent with the Act, but raised concerns about the adequacy of security controls for online signatures. CPC committed to implementing enhanced security measures.

Key Issues
  • Whether the collection of electronic signatures by CPC contravenes the Privacy Act
  • Whether the disclosure of electronic signatures to the sender of a parcel contravenes the Privacy Act
  • Whether the disclosure of electronic signatures online contravenes the Privacy Act
  • Whether CPC adequately safeguards digitized signatures displayed online
  • Whether the information provided to addressees about opting out of online signature display is sufficiently clear