Can consent be impled or must it be express?
It is agreed by most who have grappled with PIPEDA that express consent is required for sensitive personal information – that is, for the collection, use and disclosure of ~n individual’s financial and medical information and personal identification numbers such as social insurance and driver licence numbers. What is less clear, however, is if express consent is required to collect, use and disclose personal information such as an image on a videotape which has been captured from a public place. In Druken v. RG Fewer & Associates Inc., [1989] N.J. No. 312 (S.C.), the court held that in the Canadian justice system, while the mere commencement of an action does not grant a defendant the licence to delve into private aspects of a plaintiffs life that are not relevant to the subject matter of the litigation, a litigant must accept such intrusions upon their right to privacy as is necessary to enable a judge or jury to get to the truth and render a just verdict. On this basis, the court in
