Insurance Corporation of British Columbia v. Ari
Insurance Corporation of British Columbia
Law Firm / Organization
Not Specified
Ufuk Ari
Law Firm / Organization
Not Specified
Lawyer(s)

G.J. Collette

Key Points:

  • Background:

    • ICBC employee Candy Rheaume accessed and sold personal information (linking license plates to home addresses) of customers.
    • This information was used for criminal activities, including arson and shootings.
    • ICBC was found vicariously liable for the breach of privacy under the Privacy Act, R.S.B.C. 1996, c. 373.
  • Appeal Issues:

    • ICBC argued the information was not private, vicarious liability was improperly imposed, and general damages should not be class-wide.
  • Court Findings:

    • Privacy Expectation:
      • Customers had a reasonable expectation that ICBC would use their information only for legitimate purposes.
      • The employee’s conduct in selling information violated privacy.
    • Vicarious Liability:
      • ICBC was liable as it created the risk and opportunity for the employee's misconduct, which was related to her duties.
    • General Damages:
      • The Privacy Act allows class-wide general damages without individualized proof.
  • Outcome:

    • Appeal dismissed; ICBC's liability upheld. However, the specific total monetary award, including costs and damages, was not detailed in the provided document.

Legal Principles:

  • Privacy Act (BC):
    • Establishes a statutory tort for willful violation of privacy, actionable without proof of damage.
    • Privacy expectations are contextual.
  • Vicarious Liability:
    • Employers can be liable for employees’ actions if related to job duties and if the employer created the risk.

Implications:

  • Organizations must protect customer information and monitor employee access.
  • Privacy breaches can lead to class action claims and significant legal consequences.
Court of Appeals for British Columbia
CA48569
Employment law
Respondent