The Court鈥檚 decision ultimately rejected Facebook鈥檚 attempt to enforce a 鈥渇orum selection clause鈥 to block a privacy class action lawsuit in British Columbia on the grounds that its own contract specified that legal actions should be brought in California. The Court ruled that the unequal bargaining power between consumers and companies such as Facebook, not to mention the privacy rights of Canadians, necessitated that the forum selection clause should not be enforced and that the lawsuit should proceed in Canada. Ultimately, the decision represents a clear recognition that courts should not be quick to allow companies to deny consumers important rights by using contractual terms to override inconvenient laws and protections.
Professor Geist鈥檚 2001 paper is cited in the decision, as is Professor Pavlovi膰鈥檚 2016 paper . The Court also quotes the intervention presented by the Faculty鈥檚 own , work on which was led by Clinic Director David Fewer and Staff Lawyer Tamir Israel. Professors Pavlovi膰 and de Beer, along with of Siskinds LLP, represented CIPPIC before the Supreme Court.
Finally, in a laudable example of the enthusiastic commitment to experiential learning by the Faculty of Law and the , several students at CIPPIC contributed to the research and the intervention that led to the eventual decision, including Jeremiah Barbee (JD c. 2018), Meika Ellis (JD 2017) and earlier on Michael La Sorda.
Congratulations to all of the contributors to this important ruling!
This decision is a wonderful testament to the excellence of the scholarship and advocacy at the Centre for Law, Technology and Society and at the !