United Food & Commercial Workers Union, Local 1518 v. Sunrise Poultry Processors Ltd.

United Food & Commercial Workers Union, Local 1518 v. Sunrise Poultry Processors Ltd.

This Court has jurisdiction under s.100 because the Privacy Award raised a novel question of general law; although the arbitrator erred in some statutory characterizations, disclosure of personal information in arbitration reasons without individual consent is authorized by law under PIPA s.18(1)(o) because s.96 of...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
2015 BCCA 354
Parties
Appellant (plaintiff): United Food & Commercial Workers Union, Local 1518; Respondent (defendant): Sunrise Poultry Processors Ltd.
Court
British Columbia Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
12 August 2015
Procedural Posture
Labour Arbitration Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Personal Information Protection Act, Labour Relations Code S.100 Jurisdiction, Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act, Administrative Tribunals Act S.61, Disclosure of Arbitration Awards, Consent Requirements Under PIPA, Open Court Principle
Source Language
english
Labour Law Privacy Law Administrative Law Statutory Interpretation Freedom of Expression Personal Information Protection Act Labour Relations Code S.100 Jurisdiction Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act +4 more

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 16 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

United Food & Commercial Workers Union, Local 1518

Appellant (plaintiff)

Sunrise Poultry Processors Ltd.

Respondent (defendant)

Procedural Posture

Labour Arbitration Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Court of Appeal has jurisdiction under s.100 of the Labour Relations Code to review the arbitrator's Privacy Award as a matter of general law
  2. 2 Whether PIPA applies to labour arbitrators and, if so, whether consent is required to disclose personal information in arbitration awards
  3. 3 Whether disclosure of arbitration reasons to the Director under s.96 of the Code is 'required or authorized by law' for the purposes of PIPA s.18(1)(o)

Ratio Decidendi

This Court has jurisdiction under s.100 because the Privacy Award raised a novel question of general law; although the arbitrator erred in some statutory characterizations, disclosure of personal information in arbitration reasons without individual consent is authorized by law under PIPA s.18(1)(o) because s.96 of the Labour Relations Code requires an arbitration board to file its award (including reasons) with the Director who must make it available for public inspection, thus PIPA's consent provisions do not prevent such disclosure.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Arbitration award upheld