I recently posted a blog regarding the Canadian PIPEDA. A decision from a Canadian Federal court discussing PIPEDA and its jurisdiction was recently brought to my attention and deserves mention here. Lawson v. Accusearch Inc., 2007 FC 125 (CanLII).
Philippa Lawson is a Canadian citizen and executive director of the Canadian Internet Policy and Public Interest Clinic at the University of Ottawa’s Faculty of Law. Ms. Lawson filed a complaint with the Canadian Privacy Commissioner regarding an American company that allegedly violated the Canadian PIPEDA. She alleged that although based in the United States, Abika.com violated PIPEDA in a number of respects.
After a preliminary investigation, the Privacy Commissioner determined that PIPEDA did not grant her jurisdiction over Akiba.com, or its parent company Accusearch, Inc. Ms. Lawson thereafter reformulated her complaint to account for this denial of jurisdiction. The Canadian Federal court analyzed PIPEDA to determine whether Parliament vested the Privacy Commissioner with “authority to investigate complaints levied against foreign organizations which collect, use and sell the personal information of Canadians.”
Although the court agreed with the Commissioner that “PIPEDA gives no indication that Parliament intended to legislate extraterritorially,” the court ultimately concluded that the “Commissioner does not lose her power to investigate because she can neither subpoena the organization nor enter its premises in Wyoming.” The court did not provide any guidance as to the nature or scope of the Commissioner’s investigatory authority.
Therefore, it is not clear to what extent a company with no physical location and no assets in Canada could be successfully investigated by the Canadian Office of the Privacy Commissioner.
You can read the full opinion here.