Canada (Privacy Commissioner) v. Facebook, Inc.

Canada (Privacy Commissioner) v. Facebook, Inc.

The court admitted the bulk of the affiant's evidence as background and within the deponent's personal knowledge, struck limited paragraphs and exhibits that constituted inadmissible hearsay or improperly tendered expert and news materials (paragraphs 30-32, 50, 97 and Exhibits I, J, K, L, N, O, P, S), and dismissed the Commissioner's bid to strike Facebook's judicial review as lacking a clear fatal flaw because Facebook raised at least a arguable procedural fairness claim and extension/time issues that require merits consideration rather than resolution on a strike motion.

Citation
2021 FC 599
Parties
Applicant (t 190 20); Respondent (t 473 20): Privacy Commissioner of Canada; Respondent (t 190 20); Applicant (t 473 20): Facebook, Inc.
Court
Federal Court
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
15 June 2021
Procedural Posture
Consolidated PIPEDA Enforcement Application and Application for Judicial Review / Interlocutory Motions to Strike (evidence Admissibility and Motion to Strike Application for Judicial Review)
Outcome
Facebook's motion to strike the Michael Maguire affidavit granted in part; Commissioner's motion to strike Facebook's Application for Judicial Review dismissed; no costs awarded to either party
Legal Topics
PIPEDA, Judicial Review, Motions to Strike, Hearsay and Admissibility, Settlement Privilege, Extension of Time, Adequacy of Alternative Remedies, De Novo Review
Source Language
English
Administrative Law Privacy Law Evidence Civil Procedure PIPEDA Judicial Review Motions to Strike Hearsay and Admissibility +4 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 6 Authorities cited 19 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Privacy Commissioner of Canada

Applicant (t 190 20); Respondent (t 473 20)

Facebook, Inc.

Respondent (t 190 20); Applicant (t 473 20)

Procedural Posture

Consolidated PIPEDA Enforcement Application and Application for Judicial Review / Interlocutory Motions to Strike (evidence Admissibility and Motion to Strike Application for Judicial Review)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether portions of an extensive affidavit and specified exhibits are inadmissible hearsay, opinion, expert material, foreign material or otherwise irrelevant or privileged
  2. 2 Whether settlement or parliamentary privilege bars communications in the affidavit
  3. 3 Whether Facebook's application for judicial review should be struck as out of time or because an adequate alternative remedy exists

Ratio Decidendi

The court admitted the bulk of the affiant's evidence as background and within the deponent's personal knowledge, struck limited paragraphs and exhibits that constituted inadmissible hearsay or improperly tendered expert and news materials (paragraphs 30-32, 50, 97 and Exhibits I, J, K, L, N, O, P, S), and dismissed the Commissioner's bid to strike Facebook's judicial review as lacking a clear fatal flaw because Facebook raised at least a arguable procedural fairness claim and extension/time issues that require merits consideration rather than resolution on a strike motion.

Court Disposition

Facebook's motion to strike the Michael Maguire affidavit granted in part; Commissioner's motion to strike Facebook's Application for Judicial Review dismissed; no costs awarded to either party

Orders

  • Paragraphs 30-32, 50 and 97 of the March 2, 2020 affidavit of Michael Maguire are struck out
  • Exhibits I, J, K, L, N, O, P and S to the Michael Maguire affidavit are struck out