Case information

Civil procedure — Class actions — Authorization — Arguable personal cause of action — Moral damages — Cyber incident involving unauthorized and unlawful access by Amazon employee to personal information of customers of credit card company — Courts below allowing class action to proceed —Is the onus on the applicant to allege and demonstrate an arguable personal cause of action pursuant to article 575(2) of the Code of Civil of Procedure? — If this onus exists, is it different or lessened in the context of a proposed data breach class action? — In an application for authorization of a class action concerning unauthorized access to personal information, can compensable harm be inferred from the circumstances surrounding the alleged breach in order to meet the conditions set out in paragraphs (2) and (4) of article 575 of the Code of Civil Procedure? —With respect to unauthorized access to personal information, does jeopardizing financial security or the potential dissemination of information constitute compensable damages? — Code of Civil Procedure, CQLR, c. C-25.01, art. 575.

Case summaries are prepared by the Office of the Registrar of the Supreme Court of Canada (Law Branch). Please note that summaries are not provided to the Judges of the Court. They are placed on the Court file and website for information purposes only.

In March 2019, a cyber incident occurred whereby a former employee of the applicant Amazon group gained unauthorized and unlawful entry to the applicant Capital One group’s credit card application processing system and accessed certain types of personal information relating to people who had applied for or were customers of certain Capital One credit card products. The respondent, M. Royer, applied to institute a class proceeding before Quebec courts, alleging damage suffered as a result of the incident. The Superior Court granted M. Royer’s authorization application, and the Court of Appeal allowed his appeal seeking to broaden the scope of compensable loss claimed to include moral damages. At the same time, the Court of Appeal dismissed the Capital One group and Amazon group’s incidental appeals which sought to dismiss M. Royer’s authorization application on the basis of deficiencies in his pleadings.