CourtSupreme Court of British Columbia
Date FiledJune 17, 2020
After securing the breach, on December 17, 2019, LifeLabs made a public announcement regarding the cyberattack and the resulting privacy breach. The Privacy Commissioners in Ontario and B.C. conducted a detailed joint investigation of the breach, in which they were highly critical of the cyber-security LifeLabs had in place at the time of the breach. LifeLabs has opposed the release of these Privacy Commissioners’ full reports.
CFM Lawyers has joined forces with other law firms in Ontario to pursue a proposed class action against LifeLabs and associated companies in respect of the privacy breaches that LifeLabs’ customers suffered. The claim alleges that LifeLabs had inadequate cybersecurity, which allowed hackers to penetrate LifeLabs’ computer network, and extract the personal health information and other private information of an estimated 8.6 million Canadians. The compromised information includes medical lab test results, health card numbers, dates of birth, and other sensitive information. The vast majority of affected individuals are in Ontario and B.C., but individuals in other provinces and territories have been affected as well.
The Class Proceeding
This class action alleges that the defendants are liable for breach of privacy, breach of contract and negligence, as well as other wrongs. When the claim was commenced, it included a claim for “intrusion upon seclusion”, which allows for a claim for damages without proof of loss. Since then, the courts (up to the Supreme Court of Canada) have determined that a claim for intrusion upon seclusion cannot be brought against the corporate victim of a third party cyber-attack. Rather, to succeed in the action, the victims would each have to prove that they suffered personal losses that they can prove were caused by the theft of their personal information.
Several competing proposed class actions were commenced, but the plaintiffs agreed to proceed with one lead national action, to be prosecuted in Ontario. A companion action has been brought in BC, but is being held in abeyance while the Ontario action is being litigated.