You are here

Home

Privacy & information

Nanotechnology and the United States National Plan for Research and Development In Support of Critical Infrastructure Protection

Wed, 2008-10-15 20:38 — Lisa Campbell
Research articles : 
Privacy & information
In an effort to predict and avert threats to national security, governments in general and that of the United States in particular, have devoted considerable resources to developing technological systems that gather information about individuals. In the past five years, the U.S. government has collected information about the movement of individuals across and within its national borders from various sources, including border security stations, law enforcement officials, and immigration authorities. Until recently, it seemed impossible for the U.S. government to draw useful analyses from all of the data it is collecting. The sheer volume and complexity of the information made it appear unworkable to perform an analysis in time to act pre-emptively. Now, developments in computing technology suggest that not only will it soon be possible to collect and process vast amounts of data, it will be possible to do so in real time, giving law enforcement officials unprecedented capacities to engage proactively.
 

Is it legal to record a private conversation? Wiretapping and the one party consent exception to the rule against interception

Tue, 2008-05-06 19:32 — Anonymous (not verified)
Research articles : 
Privacy & information
Michael Dew is a Vancouver lawyer who practices civil litigation (including ICBC cases). Click here for contact information and further details about Michael’s practice.

 
Synopsis
This article considers whether it is legal to record private conversations in Canada. The discussion distinguishes between conversations that the person recording is involved in and conversations that the person recording is merely eavesdropping on.
 
The Criminal Code, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-46 [Criminal Code] imposes a general prohibition on interception (recording) of private communications, but then provides an exception where one of the parties to the private communication consents to the interception of that communication. Thus, broadly speaking, Canadians can legally record their own conversations with other people, but not other peoples' conversations that they are not involved in.
 

Freedom of information legislation as a tool for obtaining meaningful law school grade information

Wed, 2007-10-24 18:36 — Michael Dew
Research articles : 
Privacy & information
Michael Dew is a Vancouver lawyer who practices civil litigation. Click here for contact information and further details about Michael’s practice.
 
Synopsis
Not being satisfied with the grade information provided by UBC for the courses I took while at law school, I applied for individual class ranks for the classes I took from Fall 2003 to Spring 2007. After much resistance, UBC finally provided information that allowed me to determine my individual class ranks, as it was obliged to do under s. 4(2) of the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act, R.S.B.C. 1996, c. 165 [the Act].  This article sets out the deficiencies in the grade information currently provided to law students by UBC, and explains the statutory basis on which students can apply for meaningful grade information.  
 
1. Introduction

The duty on public bodies to create records under the British Columbia Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act

Wed, 2007-10-17 22:09 — Michael Dew
Research articles : 
Privacy & information
Michael Dew is a Vancouver lawyer who practices in all areas of civil litigation (including ICBC cases). Click here for contact information and further details about Michael’s practice.
 
Summary
The Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act, R.S.B.C. 1996, c. 165 [the Act] provides the public in British Columbia with a broad right to disclosure of records held by public bodies. Although public bodies generally do not need to create records not already in existence, s. 6(2) of the Act imposes a limited duty to create records where doing so will not impose an unreasonable burden on the organization. Furthermore, under s. 4(2) of the Act, the public body may be obliged to sever information from an existing record which will, in effect, create a new record. This article reviews the scope of the obligation to create requested records that are not in existence when requested.
 
Introduction

Subscribe to Privacy & information

Copyright © 2007-2023 Legaltree Publishing Inc.

Legaltree was founded by Michael Dew, a Vancouver lawyer and is owned and operated by Legaltree Publishing Inc. 

Waiver of liability: All content on www.legaltree.ca is for information only and must not be relied on in any way. No legal advice is sought by browsing this site, and none is given. All links are provided for convenience only and no sites linked to are endorsed.