Client Update: It’s here now! Breach reporting for Canadian businesses under PIPEDA
You likely heard rumblings over the spring and summer, but now it’s here. Canada’s federal privacy law known by the acronym PIPEDA (Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act) adds privacy breach reporting as of November 1, 2018.
The gist of the breach reporting obligations is as follows:
A business will be required to report to the Privacy Commissioner a breach involving personal information (“PI”) under its control (including with a service provider) if it is reasonable to believe that the breach creates a real risk of significant harm to the individual. (The Privacy Commissioner notes that it does not matter if it is one or thousands of affected persons).
Significant harm is defined to include humiliation, damage to reputation or relationships, loss of employment, business or professional opportunities, financial loss, identity theft, negative effects on credit record, and damage to or loss of property.
Factors relevant to the real risk of significant harm include sensitivity of the PI, and the probability that it may be misused.
The report to the Commissioner would need to describe the breach, when it occurred, the PI that is subject, the estimated number of individuals affected, and the steps that the organization is taking in response.
Your business would also need to notify individuals whose PI is involved, if that breach creates a real risk of significant harm to the individual.
The notice to the individual would need to describe the breach, when it occurred, the PI affected, the steps the organization is taking, plus information about the business’ complaints process and the individual’s rights under PIPEDA.
The business could be obliged to notify other organizations or government if the business believes that these other bodies may be able to reduce the risk of harm.
Reports must be made “as soon as feasible after the breach”. The express goal is in part to reduce risks of harm, so reports may need to be made well before the full story of the breach is known.
Another big change with this new legislation is that businesses shall be obliged to keep and maintain records of EVERY breach of security safeguards involving PI; i.e. whether or not it meets any particular harm test. In addition, businesses must, on request, provide the Commissioner with access to copies of these records. (So businesses will be obliged to maintain records which will help the Commissioner and any claimant build a case against the business.)
The regulations require records of breach to be maintained for 24 months after the date that the business determined that the breach occurred. In addition, these records must enable the Commissioner to verify compliance with the business’ reporting obligations to the Commissioner and to individuals, if there has been a breach which creates a real risk of significant harm.
Any breach of these obligations may result in the business being charged with an offence, which could result in a fine not exceeding $100,000.
The obligation to report privacy breaches is not new to many jurisdictions, but will be new to much of Canada, and compels every business to sharpen their privacy practices – because going public with a breach can make the impact a much larger mess.
You can find the federal Privacy Commissioner’s Guidelines on reporting breaches here.
This update is intended for general information only. If you have questions about the above information, please contact Rob Aske, or a member of our information technology, internet and privacy group.
Version française à suivre Sara Espinal Henao Canada has expanded its permanent and temporary immigration requirements to include biometrics – the measurement of unique physical characteristics, such as fingerprints and facial features. The new requirements,…Read More
Many businesses rely on trade-mark, copyright, and patent law for the protection of their intellectual property (IP). The Federal Government recently proposed changes to IP laws, which may impact your business. Bill C-86, Budget Implementation Act,…Read More
Julia Parent and David Wedlake (special thanks to Graham Haynes for his assistance) In a rare decision from the bench, the Supreme Court of Canada (“SCC”) allowed the appeal of Callidus Capital Corporation in the matter…Read More
Mark Tector and Killian McParland ‘Tis again the season for the company holiday party. And while the party planners are starting to break out the eggnog, there are some lessons learned from seasons past to…Read More
Mark Tector and Richard Jordan The Nova Scotia Occupational Health and Safety Act (the “Act”) provides that “contractors” and “constructors” have similar, but not identical, responsibilities, with a “Constructor” having greater authority and more responsibility for the health and…Read More
Julia Parent and Graham Haynes On October 29, 2018, the federal government tabled national pay equity legislation as part of its second budget implementation bill, Bill C-86. This legislation is targeted at reducing the portion of the…Read More
Rob Aske You likely heard rumblings over the spring and summer, but now it’s here. Canada’s federal privacy law known by the acronym PIPEDA (Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act) adds privacy breach reporting…Read More
Guy-Etienne Richard The Nova Scotia government introduced Bill 29 on September 14, 2018 to increase pregnancy and parental leave to reflect the recent changes by the federal government to Employment Insurance (“EI”). Those EI changes…Read More
We are pleased to present the third issue of Discovery: Atlantic Education and the Law, our very own legal publication targeted to educational institutions in Atlantic Canada. A new school year has begun and fall…Read More
Kevin Landry News articles have reported Canadians being labelled as “inadmissible” or being denied entry at the United States’ border because of ties to the cannabis industry. Being labeled inadmissible by border authorities is the…Read More