Vanderbeke v. Royal Bank of Canada, 2006 FC 651

• Judge: Noël, J.
• Court: Federal Court (Canada)
• Case Date: May 23, 2006
• Jurisdiction: Canada (Federal)
• Citations: 2006 FC 651;(2006), 294 F.T.R. 216 (FC)

Vanderbeke v. Royal Bk. (2006), 294 F.T.R. 216 (FC)

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2006] F.T.R. TBEd. JN.036

Keith Vanderbeke (applicant) v. Royal Bank of Canada (respondent)

(T-222-04; 2006 FC 651)

Indexed As: Vanderbeke v. Royal Bank of Canada

Federal Court

Noël, J.

June 2, 2006.

Summary:

Vanderbeke was a guarantor of a mortgage of $249,000 in favour of the Royal Bank of Canada (RBC). The mortgage went into default. The RBC obtained a monetary judgment against Vanderbeke and took steps to have the judgment enforced. Vanderbeke claimed that the mortgage had been renewed. He filed a complaint with the Privacy Commissioner of Canada pursuant to s. 11 of the Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act, complaining that the RBC failed to provide him with personal information relating to his mortgage. The Commissioner concluded that the complaint was not well founded. An application for judicial review was dismissed. Vanderbeke filed a second complaint with the Commissioner, alleging that the RBC did not properly retain mortgage renewal acknowledgement letters for its clients. The Commissioner concluded that the complaint was not well founded. Vanderbeke applied for judicial review.

The Federal Court dismissed the application.

Trade Regulation - Topic 9442

Protection of personal information and electronic documents - Protection, collection or disclosure of personal information - Collection - What constitutes - Vanderbeke was a guarantor of a mortgage in favour of the Royal Bank of Canada (RBC) - The mortgage went into default - The RBC obtained a monetary judgment against Vanderbeke and took steps to have the judgment enforced - Vanderbeke claimed that the mortgage had been renewed - He filed a complaint with the Privacy Commissioner of Canada pursuant to s. 11 of the Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act (PIPEDA), complaining that the RBC did not properly retain mortgage renewal acknowledgement letters for its clients under s. 4(1) of the PIPEDA - The Federal Court dismissed the application - The terms of the mortgage, the mortgage number and the mortgagor’s address included in the letters constituted personal information under the PIPEDA - The RBC was under no obligation to retain the letters, as long as all the information contained in the letters was retained by the RBC in some form or other databanks and that this information could be recollected upon request subject to a retention period - The remaining information could be retrieved by a proposal inquiry from the On-line Mortgage System, the Enterprise Data warehouse and a software program called IMAGE - Accordingly, the retention requirements of the PIPEDA had been met - See paragraphs 16 to 23.

Cases Noticed:

Englander v. Telus Communications Inn (2004), 328 N.R. 297; 2004 FCA 387, refd to. [para. 12].

Turner et al. v. Telus Communications Inc. et al. (2005), 284 F.T.R. 38; 2005 FC 1601, refd to. [para. 12].

Counsel:

Paul Bigioni, for the applicant;

Thomas Conway, for the respondent.

Solicitors of Record:

Bigioni LLP, Markham, Ontario, for the applicant;

Lerners LLP, London, Ontario, for the respondent.

This application was heard on May 23, 2006, at Toronto, Ontario, by Noël, J., of the Federal Court, who delivered the following judgment on June 2, 2006.