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)Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents ActWell-founded & conditionally resolved
Federal (Canada) flag
Dec 1, 2025PIPEDA Findings #2025-004Indexed Jun 30, 2026

PIPEDA Findings #2025-004: Investigation into the privacy practices of Staples Canada ULC related to electronic devices to be resold as part of its Openbox program

Staples Canada ULC

A former employee complained that Staples Canada ULC (Staples) failed to adequately protect and remove personal information from returned laptops before reselling them through its Openbox program. The complainant alleged that Staples lacked adequate internal policies, processes, and training for staff to wipe data from these devices. The OPC's investigation found deficiencies in Staples' policies, procedures, and training, and that employees did not consistently follow manufacturer guidelines for data wiping, leading to residual personal information on 23% of sampled devices. Staples agreed to implement recommendations to improve its data wiping procedures, training, and to arrange for independent third-party spot checks. The OPC concluded that Staples contravened PIPEDA Principles 4.7.1 and 4.7.3.

Quick view

Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents ActWell-founded & conditionally resolved

PIPEDA Findings #2025-004: Investigation into the privacy practices of Staples Canada ULC related to electronic devices to be resold as part of its Openbox program

Dec 1, 2025PIPEDA Findings #2025-004
Adjudicator: Philippe Dufresne
Plain-Language Summary

A former employee complained that Staples Canada ULC (Staples) failed to adequately protect and remove personal information from returned laptops before reselling them through its Openbox program. The complainant alleged that Staples lacked adequate internal policies, processes, and training for staff to wipe data from these devices. The OPC's investigation found deficiencies in Staples' policies, procedures, and training, and that employees did not consistently follow manufacturer guidelines for data wiping, leading to residual personal information on 23% of sampled devices. Staples agreed to implement recommendations to improve its data wiping procedures, training, and to arrange for independent third-party spot checks. The OPC concluded that Staples contravened PIPEDA Principles 4.7.1 and 4.7.3.

Key Issues
  • Whether Staples had adequate security safeguards to protect personal information on returned laptops under Principle 4.7.1 PIPEDA
  • Whether Staples' methods of protection included adequate physical, organizational, and technological measures under Principle 4.7.3 PIPEDA
  • Whether Staples' internal policies and procedures for data wiping were clear and consistent
  • Whether Staples provided adequate training to employees responsible for wiping data from returned devices
  • Whether Staples consistently performed full data wipes according to manufacturer instructions on returned laptops
Federal (Canada)Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents ActWell-founded & conditionally resolved
Federal (Canada) flag
Sep 23, 2025PIPEDA Findings #2025-003Indexed Jun 30, 2026

PIPEDA Findings #2025-003: Joint investigation of TikTok Pte. Ltd. by the Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada, the Commission d’accès à l’information du Québec, the Office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner for British Columbia, and the Office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner of Alberta

TikTok Pte. Ltd.

A joint investigation by the Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada (OPC) and provincial privacy regulators (CAI, OIPC BC, OIPC AB) examined TikTok Pte. Ltd.'s compliance with federal and provincial private sector privacy laws. The investigation focused on TikTok's collection, use, and disclosure of personal information for ad targeting and content personalization, with a particular emphasis on practices affecting children. The Offices found that TikTok's age assurance measures were inadequate, leading to the collection and use of sensitive personal information from a large number of underage users for purposes deemed inappropriate. Furthermore, TikTok failed to obtain valid and meaningful consent from both adult and youth users due to unclear, inaccessible, and incomplete privacy communications, including regarding biometric information and cross-border data transfers. The CAI specifically identified contraventions related to Quebec's transparency and privacy-by-default obligations. While TikTok disagreed with the findings, it committed to implementing enhanced age assurance mechanisms, improving privacy communications, and limiting ad targeting for under-18 users. The Offices concluded the matter as well-founded and conditionally resolved, contingent on TikTok's satisfactory implementation of these significant commitments.

Quick view

Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents ActWell-founded & conditionally resolved

PIPEDA Findings #2025-003: Joint investigation of TikTok Pte. Ltd. by the Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada, the Commission d’accès à l’information du Québec, the Office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner for British Columbia, and the Office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner of Alberta

Sep 23, 2025PIPEDA Findings #2025-003
Adjudicator: Philippe Dufresne
Plain-Language Summary

A joint investigation by the Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada (OPC) and provincial privacy regulators (CAI, OIPC BC, OIPC AB) examined TikTok Pte. Ltd.'s compliance with federal and provincial private sector privacy laws. The investigation focused on TikTok's collection, use, and disclosure of personal information for ad targeting and content personalization, with a particular emphasis on practices affecting children. The Offices found that TikTok's age assurance measures were inadequate, leading to the collection and use of sensitive personal information from a large number of underage users for purposes deemed inappropriate. Furthermore, TikTok failed to obtain valid and meaningful consent from both adult and youth users due to unclear, inaccessible, and incomplete privacy communications, including regarding biometric information and cross-border data transfers. The CAI specifically identified contraventions related to Quebec's transparency and privacy-by-default obligations. While TikTok disagreed with the findings, it committed to implementing enhanced age assurance mechanisms, improving privacy communications, and limiting ad targeting for under-18 users. The Offices concluded the matter as well-founded and conditionally resolved, contingent on TikTok's satisfactory implementation of these significant commitments.

Key Issues
  • Whether TikTok was collecting, using, and disclosing personal information, particularly with respect to children, for an appropriate, reasonable, and legitimate purpose.
  • Whether TikTok's age assurance mechanisms were effective in preventing underage users from accessing the platform.
  • Whether TikTok obtained valid and meaningful consent from its users for tracking, profiling, targeting, and content personalization.
  • Whether TikTok's privacy communications provided sufficient upfront, clear, and comprehensive information to adult users to ensure meaningful consent.
  • Whether TikTok adequately explained its collection and use of users' biometric information to ensure meaningful consent.
  • Whether TikTok's privacy communications were adequate to obtain meaningful consent from youth (13-17), considering their cognitive development and potential harms from targeted ads.
  • Whether TikTok met its obligations under Quebec's Private Sector Act to inform persons concerned about the collection and use of personal information for user profiles, ad targeting, and content personalization.
  • Whether TikTok ensured that privacy settings provided the highest level of privacy by default under Quebec's Private Sector Act.