Background:

• The OMA, a non-profit representing Ontario physicians, commissioned a study to aid in negotiations with the provincial government on physician compensation.
• The OMA intended to share physicians’ personal information with Statistics Canada (StatCan) to facilitate this study.
• The Ontario Specialists Association (OSA) filed a complaint to the Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada (OPC), asserting that the study would violate PIPEDA.

OPC Determination:

• The OPC ruled the study was not “commercial activity” under PIPEDA as it involved advocacy and negotiations for physician well-being rather than direct commercial transactions.
• The OPC, therefore, determined that it lacked jurisdiction over the complaint.

Issue:

• The primary issue was whether the OMA’s proposed study constitutes “commercial activity” under PIPEDA.

Analysis:

• Legal Framework: PIPEDA applies to personal information collected or disclosed in the course of commercial activities.
• The Court held that the OMA’s study was intended to support advocacy and negotiations rather than “exchange, trade, buying and selling.”
• The OMA's lack of profit motive and non-commercial nature of the study were emphasized.
• The Court distinguished this from previous cases involving law firms or direct commercial actors.

Conclusion:

• The proposed study does not constitute "commercial activity," so PIPEDA does not apply.
• The application for judicial review was dismissed without costs.