Chitrakar v. Bell TV, (2013) 441 F.T.R. 254 (FC)
| Judge | Phelan, J. |
| Court | Federal Court (Canada) |
| Case Date | October 17, 2013 |
| Jurisdiction | Canada (Federal) |
| Citations | (2013), 441 F.T.R. 254 (FC);2013 FC 1103 |
Chitrakar v. Bell TV (2013), 441 F.T.R. 254 (FC)
MLB headnote and full text
[French language version follows English language version]
[La version française vient à la suite de la version anglaise]
.........................
Temp. Cite: [2013] F.T.R. TBEd. NO.005
Rabi Chitrakar (applicant) v. Bell TV (respondent)
(T-358-13; 2013 FC 1103; 2013 CF 1103)
Indexed As: Chitrakar v. Bell TV
Federal Court
Phelan, J.
October 29, 2013.
Summary:
Chitrakar applied for relief against Bell TV under s. 14(1) of the Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act (PIPEDA), because Bell TV ordered a credit report without his consent.
The Federal Court allowed the application and awarded damages of $10,000 plus exemplary damages of $10,000.
Damages - Topic 1300.1
Exemplary or punitive damages - Violation of privacy - [See Trade Regulation - Topic 9432 ].
Trade Regulation - Topic 9432
Protection of personal information and electronic documents - Remedies (incl. complaints, investigation, reports and particular remedies) - Damages - Chitrakar ordered satellite television service from Bell TV - Bell TV obtained a credit report without Chitrakar's consent - Chitrakar applied for relief (Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act (PIPEDA), s. 14(1)) - The Federal Court awarded Chitrakar damages of $10,000 plus exemplary damages of $10,000 for Bell's conduct - Bell violated Chitrakar's privacy rights under PIPEDA by conducting a credit check without his prior consent - The court stated that Bell's conduct was reprehensible - Chitrakar had his rights violated in a real sense with potentially adverse consequences - Bell had taken no steps to compensate Chitrakar.
Cases Noticed:
Ward v. Vancouver (City) et al., [2010] 2 S.C.R. 28; 404 N.R. 1; 290 B.C.A.C. 222; 491 W.A.C. 222; 2010 SCC 27, refd to. [para. 26].
Statutes Noticed:
Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act, S.C. 2000, c. 5, sect. 14(1) [para. 2]; Schedule 1, s. 4.3, principle 3 [para. 3].
Counsel:
Rabi Chitrakar, on his own behalf, for the applicant;
N/A, for the respondent.
Solicitors of Record:
[None disclosed].
This application was heard in Halifax, Nova Scotia, on October 17, 2013, before Phelan, J., of the Federal Court, who delivered the following decision in Ottawa, Ontario, on October 29, 2013.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Table of cases
...(Minister of Indian and Northern Affairs), [1999] FCJ No 1822 (CA) .............................................. 196 Chitrakar v Bell TV, 2013 FC 1103 ..............................................................391, 392 Ciba-Geigy Canada Ltd v Apotex, [1992] 3 SCR 120 .........................
-
Personal Information in the Private Sector
...636 AT v Globe24h.com , above note 47 at paras 97–99, citing Nammo , above note 30; Townsend , above note 632; Chitrakar v Bell TV , 2013 FC 1103 [ Chitrakar ]. 637 Montalbo , above note 536 at para 60 (summarizing factors from previous cases); Girao , above note 633 at paras 46–48. 638 Mig......
-
A.T. c. Globe24h.com,
...Costeja González, C-131/12 [2014], CURIA; Townsend v. Sun Life Financial, 2012 FC 550, 103 C.P.R. (4th) 424; Chitrakar v. Bell TV, 2013 FC 1103, 441 F.T.R. 254.AUTHORS CITEDCanadian Judicial Council. Model Policy for Access to Court Records in Canada, September 2005.Ofce of the......
-
Al-Husseini v. Altaif Inc., 2022 FC 1497
...evidence” of damages to succeed in being granted an award under s 16 of PIPEDA. In that regard, he relies on Chitrakar v Bell TV, 2013 FC 1103 [Chitrakar]. However, Miglialo is a more recent statement of the law on this point (see also Blum v Mortgage Architects Inc, 2015 FC 323 at p......
-
A.T. c. Globe24h.com,
...Costeja González, C-131/12 [2014], CURIA; Townsend v. Sun Life Financial, 2012 FC 550, 103 C.P.R. (4th) 424; Chitrakar v. Bell TV, 2013 FC 1103, 441 F.T.R. 254.AUTHORS CITEDCanadian Judicial Council. Model Policy for Access to Court Records in Canada, September 2005.Ofce of the......
-
Al-Husseini v. Altaif Inc., 2022 FC 1497
...evidence” of damages to succeed in being granted an award under s 16 of PIPEDA. In that regard, he relies on Chitrakar v Bell TV, 2013 FC 1103 [Chitrakar]. However, Miglialo is a more recent statement of the law on this point (see also Blum v Mortgage Architects Inc, 2015 FC 323 at p......
-
Albayate v. Bank of Montreal et al., [2015] B.C.T.C. Uned. 695
...in place to protect against unauthorized use, alteration or disclosure of client's personal information. [81] In Chitrakar v. Bell , 2013 FC 1103, the court noted at para. 2, that the scheme of the PIPEDA establishes a form of statutory test for breach of privacy. The applicant made a claim......
-
Cote v. Day & Ross Inc., 2015 FC 1283
...information to a bank causing credit issues resulted in an award $5,000 in damages plus $1,000 in disbursements. In Chitrakar v Bell TV , 2013 FC 1103, 441 FTR 254, the respondent had ordered a credit report without the applicant's consent. This kind of check can lower a person's credit sco......
-
Damages Granted For Privacy Violations Are On The Rise
...Honourable Mr. Justice Phelan of the Federal Court awarded over $20,000 in damages following a privacy violation in Chitrakar v Bell TV, 2013 FC 1103. On December 1, 2010, Chitraker, a first-time Bell Customer with no credit history with Bell ordered a satellite television service. The serv......
-
More On Damages Under PIPEDA By The Federal Court
...legal costs. Notably, in considering the amount of damages to award, the Federal Court specifically distinguished Chitrakar v. Bell TV, 2013 FC 1103 where the Federal Court awarded damages in the amount of $21,000.00. As the Court stated at paragraph Chitrakar is distinguishable from the cu......
-
Table of cases
...(Minister of Indian and Northern Affairs), [1999] FCJ No 1822 (CA) .............................................. 196 Chitrakar v Bell TV, 2013 FC 1103 ..............................................................391, 392 Ciba-Geigy Canada Ltd v Apotex, [1992] 3 SCR 120 .........................
-
Personal Information in the Private Sector
...636 AT v Globe24h.com , above note 47 at paras 97–99, citing Nammo , above note 30; Townsend , above note 632; Chitrakar v Bell TV , 2013 FC 1103 [ Chitrakar ]. 637 Montalbo , above note 536 at para 60 (summarizing factors from previous cases); Girao , above note 633 at paras 46–48. 638 Mig......