Civil Claims for Violation of Privacy

AuthorBarbara Von Tigerstrom
Pages55-139
55
CHAPTER 2
CIVIL CLAIMS FOR
VIOLATION OF PRIVACY
When someone’s privacy is violated, one potential remedy is a civil
claim against the person or persons responsible for the violation. Civil
claims play a role alongside the administrative and judicial mechan-
isms dealing with concerns about personal information, which are dis-
cussed in later chapters. Depending on the jurisdiction, context, and
nature of the violation, these claims could be based on a specific statu-
tory or common law tort for violation of privacy, other torts or causes
of action, or some combination of these. Canadian law in this area is
still evolving, as the courts recognize new causes of action and adapt
existing ones to addre ss the various types of wrongs t hat fall under the
broad heading of “violation of privacy.” In doing so, they have been
able to draw on experiences in other common law jurisdictions, some
of which are described in Section A below. Following sections will
discuss the statutory tort of violation of privacy that is available in
some provinces, the emergence of common law privacy torts i n Canada,
other causes of action that have been used in this context, and specific
claims available in Quebec.
A. DEVELOPMENT OF THE LAW IN OTHER
COMMON LAW JURISDICTIONS
Although many tort claims are broadly similar across common law
jurisdictions, there are significant differences in the approaches taken
INFORM ATION AND PRIVACY LAW IN CANADA56
to distinct claims for violation of privacy. These differences reflect, in
part, a range of views about the interests that these claims aim to pro-
tect and how they relate to other causes of action with which they may
overlap. A review of these approaches is interesting in its own right
from a theoretical and comparative perspective, and will also be useful
in understanding how Can adian law in this area h as evolved, because it
has been inf luenced in important ways by the law in other jur isdictions.
1) United States
Many discussions of the development of privacy claims in the United
States take as their starting point two highly influential law review arti-
cles. In 1890, Warren and Brandeis called for the recognition of invasion
of privacy as a legal claim in their article “The Right to Privacy.”1 React-
ing to the increasing publication of photographs and “unseemly gossip”
in newspapers,2 they argued that existing protections through the laws
of defamation, copyright, contract, a nd others were inadequate to protect
individuals’ intere sts in the modern era. The right to pr ivacy, which they
famously suggested was “merely an in stance of . . . the more general right
of the individual to be let alone,” was rooted in the principle of “inviolate
personality.”3 Publishing a photograph of a previously private individual
and public discussion of that person’s private affairs were among the
types of conduct against which the right would provide protection.4
Shortly before and after the time that Warren and Brandeis were
writing, US courts accepted some claims for what later came to be
referred to as appropriation of personality, that is, using someone’s
name or image without their consent.5 Over the years that followed,
a variety of other claims were decided, dealing with these and other
1 Samuel D Warren & Loui s D Brandeis, “The Right to Privac y” (1890) 4 Harvard
Law Review 19 3.
2 Ibid at 196. The immediate i mpetus for the article was w idely believed to have
been the unaut horized publication of photograph s from the wedding of Samuel
Warren’s daughter, although hi storical research h as since revealed that to
be unlikely ; press coverage of other events, includ ing deaths and funera ls in
Warren’s family, may have ra ised similar concer ns: Amy Gajda, “What if Samuel
Warren Hadn’t Mar ried a Senator’s Daughter?: Uncovering the Pre ss Coverage
That Led to ‘The Right to P rivacy’” (2008) Michigan State Law Revie w 35.
3 Warren & Brandeis, ab ove note 1 at 205.
4 Ibid at 213.
5 See, for example, Pavesich v New England Life Insuranc e Co, 122 Ga 190, 50 SE
68 (1905). Not all claims were succes sful; see, for example, Roberson v R ochester
Folding Box Co, 171 NY 538, 64 NE 442 (1902), in which a claim for use of a
young woman’s image to advert ise flour failed, le ading to the introduction of a
statute esta blishing the tort in New York.
Civil Clai ms for Violation of Privacy57
types of violations. In another famous article, published in 1960, Dean
William Prosser surveyed these decisions and suggested that they
should best be understood not as examples of a single tort, but rather a
complex of four distinct torts, “which are tied together by the common
name, but otherwise have almost nothing in common” and represent
the invasion of different kinds of interests.6 The four categories he set
out, each with its own rules, are as follows:
1) Intrusion upon the plaintiff’s seclusion or solitude, or into his
private affairs.
2) Public disclosu re of embarrassing pr ivate facts about the plaintif f.
3) Publicity which places t he plaintiff in a fal se light in the public eye.
4) Appropriation, for the defendant’s advantage, of the plaintiff’s
name or likeness.7
Subsequent authors have challenged the assertion that these are dis-
tinct claims with little in common, arguing that common underlying
interests or principles can and should be articulated.8 Nevertheless,
the classification described in Prosser’s article, and later in the Second
Restatement of Torts,9 continues to provide the framework for pri-
vacy-related tort claims across the United States, with some variation
from state to state.10 As we will see below, it has also had an important
influence on the development of common law privacy torts in Canada.
Intrusion upon seclusion applies where the defendant has inten-
tionally intruded, physically or otherwise, into the plaintiff’s private
space or private matters, and the intrusion would be highly offen-
sive to a reasonable person.11 The intrusion could take the form of,
for example, watching or photographing someone in a private place
such as one’s home, reading private correspondence or records, or lis-
tening to or recording a private conversation.12 The intrusion itself is
6 Wil liam L Prosser, “Privacy” (1960) 48 California Law R eview 383 at 389.
7 Ibid.
8 See, for exa mple, Edward J Bloustein, “Privac y as an Aspect of Human Dig nity:
An Answer to De an Prosser” (1964) 39 New York University Law Review 962;
Ruth Gavison , “Privacy and the Limit s of Law” (1980) 89 Yale Law Journal 421;
Neil M Richard s & Daniel J Solove, “Prosser’s Pr ivacy Law: A Mixed Legac y”
(2010) 98 California Law Review 18 87.
9 Resta tement (Second) of Torts (St Paul, MN: American Law In stitute, 1977, Octo-
ber 2018 Update), Ch 28A, Invasion of Privac y [Second Restateme nt].
10Nicole A Moreham & Mark Warby, eds, Tugendhat & Chri stie: The Law of Pri-
vacy and the Media, 3d e d (Oxford: Oxford Univers ity Press, 2016) at 96 [Tugen-
dhat & Christie].
11Second Restate ment, above note 9, § 652B.
12Ibid, § 652B, comment “b.

Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI

Get Started for Free

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT