Court of Appeal for Ontario
Jones v. Tsige, 2012 ONCA 32

HISTORY

In July 2009, Sandra Jones, the plaintiff, discovered that the defendant, Winnie Tsige, had repeatedly looked into Jones’ banking records. Justice Kevin M.V. Whitaker of the Superior Court of Justice, dated March 23, 2011, was considered to have erred in granting summary judgment and dismissing Jones’ claim for damages. An appeal was granted and heard on September 29, 2011, to address the issue of Ontario law not recognizing the tort of breach of property. The following is a briefing of the court report released January 18, 2012, summarizing the primary facts, issues, and conclusions as detailed by Robert J. Sharpe J.A.

FACTS

Jones and Tsige were both employees of BMO, with Tsige in a position to access the personal account information of clients. Tsige and Jones were not known to each other, although Tsige was involved in a financial dispute with Jones’ former husband. Over the course of four years, Tsige accessed Jones’ account records at least 174 times, with the intention of determining whether Jones’ former husband was paying child support.

Tsige admitted that this was not a legitimate reason for invading Jones’ privacy, apologized, and was subsequently disciplined by BMO. No action was made to directly compensate Jones, who asserted that her privacy protection in financial matters had been “irreversibly destroyed,” and claimed damages totalling $90,000. Justice Kevin M.V. Whitaker dismissed Jones’ claims, holding that Ontario law does not recognize a cause of action for invasion of privacy.

ISSUES

The primary issue is whether Ontario should recognize a common law right of action regarding cases involving the “intrusion on seclusion.” While Ontario judges have often refused to dismiss claims based on violations of privacy, there has been no definitive