The catalogue

Canadian privacy & access decisions

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

1 decision matching
Federal (Canada)Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents ActWell-founded
Federal (Canada) flag
Nov 7, 2003PIPEDA Case Summary #2003-244Indexed Jun 30, 2026

PIPEDA Case Summary #2003-244 — Telecommunications company "A"

Telecommunications company "A"

An individual complained that a telecommunications company failed to obtain proper consent for the collection, use, and disclosure of personal information for secondary marketing purposes. The complainant alleged that the company did not adequately inform customers of these practices or provide an easy opt-out mechanism. The investigation found that while the company had a privacy policy available online and in booklets, it did not actively bring these practices to the attention of new customers during the service application process. The Assistant Commissioner determined that the company's practices did not meet the reasonable expectations of its customers and thus contravened several PIPEDA principles. The complaint was found to be well-founded, and the Assistant Commissioner recommended that the company draw customers' attention to its privacy policy and options at the time of collection.

Quick view

Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents ActWell-founded

PIPEDA Case Summary #2003-244 — Telecommunications company "A"

Nov 7, 2003PIPEDA Case Summary #2003-244
Adjudicator: Robert Marleau
Plain-Language Summary

An individual complained that a telecommunications company failed to obtain proper consent for the collection, use, and disclosure of personal information for secondary marketing purposes. The complainant alleged that the company did not adequately inform customers of these practices or provide an easy opt-out mechanism. The investigation found that while the company had a privacy policy available online and in booklets, it did not actively bring these practices to the attention of new customers during the service application process. The Assistant Commissioner determined that the company's practices did not meet the reasonable expectations of its customers and thus contravened several PIPEDA principles. The complaint was found to be well-founded, and the Assistant Commissioner recommended that the company draw customers' attention to its privacy policy and options at the time of collection.

Key Issues
  • Whether the telecommunications company obtained adequate knowledge and consent for secondary marketing purposes under Principle 4.3
  • Whether the company specified identified purposes at or before the time of collection under Principle 4.2.3
  • Whether the company made reasonable efforts to ensure individuals were advised of the purposes for which information would be used, as required by Principle 4.3.2
  • Whether the company's consent practices met the reasonable expectations of the individual under Principle 4.3.5