Turner v. Telus Communications Inc.

Turner v. Telus Communications Inc.

On the evidence the Court found voiceprints are personal information of relatively lower privacy sensitivity, Telus demonstrated bona fide security, efficiency and cost reasons and appropriate safeguards, a reasonable person would find the purposes appropriate under s.5(3), Telus met its consent obligations (and s.7(1)(a) supports limited collection where majority consent and timely consent from a small minority cannot be obtained), the union lacked standing as a complainant under s.14, and therefore the consolidated applications failed and were dismissed.

Citation
2005 FC 1601
Parties
Applicant: Randy Turner; Applicant: Paul Bernat; Applicant: Paul Wansink; Applicant: Henry Fenske; Applicant: The Telecommunications Workers Union; Respondent: Telus Communications Inc.; Added Respondent: Privacy Commissioner of Canada
Court
Federal Court
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
29 November 2005
Procedural Posture
Application Under S.14 PIPEDA (de Novo Hearing) / Reasons for Order — Decision on Consolidated Applications (dismissed)
Outcome
Applications dismissed; Telecommunications Workers Union struck as applicant; no costs ordered
Legal Topics
Biometric Data (voiceprints), Consent Under PIPEDA, Speaker Verification Technology, Collective Bargaining and Standing, S.5(3) Appropriate Purposes Balancing, S.7(1)(a) Exception to Consent
Source Language
English
Privacy Law Employment Law Administrative Law Biometric Data (voiceprints) Consent Under PIPEDA Speaker Verification Technology Collective Bargaining and Standing S.5(3) Appropriate Purposes Balancing +1 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 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Randy Turner

Applicant

Paul Bernat

Applicant

Paul Wansink

Applicant

Henry Fenske

Applicant

The Telecommunications Workers Union

Applicant

Telus Communications Inc.

Respondent

Privacy Commissioner of Canada

Added Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application Under S.14 PIPEDA (de Novo Hearing) / Reasons for Order — Decision on Consolidated Applications (dismissed)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Telus met PIPEDA consent obligations for collection and use of employee biometric information
  2. 2 Whether the purposes for collection meet the s.5(3) test of being appropriate in the circumstances
  3. 3 Whether the Telecommunications Workers Union had standing to be an applicant

Ratio Decidendi

On the evidence the Court found voiceprints are personal information of relatively lower privacy sensitivity, Telus demonstrated bona fide security, efficiency and cost reasons and appropriate safeguards, a reasonable person would find the purposes appropriate under s.5(3), Telus met its consent obligations (and s.7(1)(a) supports limited collection where majority consent and timely consent from a small minority cannot be obtained), the union lacked standing as a complainant under s.14, and therefore the consolidated applications failed and were dismissed.

Court Disposition

Applications dismissed; Telecommunications Workers Union struck as applicant; no costs ordered

Orders

  • Dismiss the consolidated applications filed T-1862-04, T-1863-04, T-1864-04 and T-1865-04
  • Order striking The Telecommunications Workers Union as an applicant in each proceeding