WHAT: BCCLA at Supreme Court of Canada to intervene in Facebook Inc. v. Privacy Commissioner of Canada to argue that the privacy of online users must be protected in the face of rapidly changing technologies
WHEN: March 19, 2026, at 9:30 am EST / 6:30 am PST
WHERE: Supreme Court of Canada (Ottawa)
Ottawa, ON / unceded Anishinabe Algonquin Territory – The BC Civil Liberties Association (BCCLA) will present oral arguments as an intervener at the Supreme Court of Canada in Facebook Inc. v. Privacy Commissioner of Canada. In 2018, a controversy erupted over the political consulting company Cambridge Analytica and its data acquisition practices. It was reported that the company had purchased personal information of up to 87 million people from the creator of a Facebook app called “This is your Digital Life,” most of whom never downloaded the app.
In 2019, the Privacy Commissioner of Canada received a complaint against Facebook alleging that the company had violated the privacy rights of its users by disclosing their personal information without their consent. The Commissioner brought an action in the Federal Court claiming that Facebook had violated the Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act (PIPEDA). The Federal Court dismissed the application, but that decision was reversed on appeal. Now, Facebook has appealed to the highest court in Canada to have the issue finally decided.
The central question in this case is what constitutes valid consent to the disclosure of information under s. 6.1 of the PIPEDA.
BCCLA has intervened in this case to argue that the PIPEDA must be interpreted in a way that keeps up with evolving technology. Although this is not a Charter case, legal rulings about the right to privacy under s. 8 of the Charter provide guiding principles that can be applied here. For instance, a reasonable expectation of privacy is focused on how things should be, not how they are. Even though we all know that information we share online is at risk of being misused, that shouldn’t mean the companies that contribute to that risk are off the hook.
The PIPEDA requires informed consent, which the legislation defines as users’ understanding the “nature, purpose and consequences” of the disclosure of their data. As the consequences of data disclosure change, such as through facial recognition and artificial intelligence, the requirements for obtaining informed consent must likewise evolve.
Vibert Jack, Litigation Director for BCCLA, says:
“Through scandals such as Cambridge Analytica, Project wide awake and Clearview AI, we have seen time and time again that when private companies collect our personal data, it is only a matter of time before it is used to violate our civil liberties. Technological advances like facial recognition and artificial intelligence are putting our privacy at risk like never before, and the law needs to keep up.”
BCCLA is represented by Cynthia Khoo of Tekhnos Law and Mark Phillips of Mouvement Légal Inc.