Supreme Court to rule on whether B.C. has to give health data to cigarette maker


The Supreme Court of Canada will rule tomorrow on whether British Columbia has to hand thousands and thousands of sufferers’ health data over to tobacco large Philip Morris Worldwide.

A ruling in B.C.’s favour might clear the way in which for the province to take cigarette makers to court docket to get better thousands and thousands in health-care restoration prices.

The province’s battle with Philip Morris Worldwide stretches again to the late 1990s, when it first filed a lawsuit towards 13 tobacco firms.

The federal government on the time argued firms marketed to kids, marketed “mild” cigarettes that they knew had been no safer than common cigarettes, and conspired to suppress analysis on the health dangers of smoking.

Consequently, B.C. argued, these firms ought to now have to assist pay the price of treating tobacco-related illnesses.

B.C.’s arguments mirrored related authorized motion in the US on the time that led to tobacco firms paying lots of of billions of {dollars} to state governments.

However the cigarette maker Philip Morris Worldwide argues it wants entry to people’ health data to make its case towards B.C. in court docket.

The province’s legal professionals have argued that releasing people’ health data — even anonymously — might violate privateness legal guidelines.

“These databases embrace individual-level data of each hospital, medical and different health care attendance, prognosis and therapy offered throughout the previous 25 years to every insured individual,” argues B.C. in paperwork filed with the Supreme Court.

Privateness considerations 

As an alternative, B.C. supplied Philip Morris data from Statistics Canada and provincial inhabitants data.

“In 1998, the plaintiff was already exhausting at work analyzing its data in anticipation of this litigation. Some 20 years later, it’s excessive time for [Philip Morris International] to give you the option to begin doing the identical,” wrote the corporate in its written submission.

Final 12 months, the B.C. Court of Attraction upheld a decrease court docket’s choice that agreed with the corporate and dominated that so as to guarantee a good trial, the province wanted to hand over the affected person data.

British Columbia’s privateness commissioner, who has intervener standing within the Supreme Court case, argues that even when the data is stored nameless, it might be mixed with different data to expose somebody’s id.

The Supreme Court of Canada will rule have to weigh privateness with the appropriate to a good trial. (Sean Kilpatrick/Canadian Press)

“The easy removing of figuring out data doesn’t essentially defend particular person privateness,” wrote the commissioner’s lawyer in a court docket submission.

“The correct to informational privateness is a crucial element of particular person dignity and autonomy, and important to the train of our elementary freedoms. Respect for particular person privateness is an integral part of what it means to be ‘free'”.

David Fewer, director of Samuelson-Glushko Canadian Web Coverage and Public Curiosity Clinic out of the College of Ottawa, stated he’d like to see the court docket come up the center on balancing privateness rights with the appropriate to a good trial.

“I believe we’re going to see from this court docket a reasonably protecting studying of private data within the laws,” he stated. “And so my expectation is that tobacco firms are going to have tough time tomorrow and British Columbia is probably going to succeed.”

Fewer, whose group additionally has intervener standing within the case, stated he’ll even be watching to see how lengthy the court docket spends discussing the danger of figuring out people when releasing data, even when it is scrubbed of names and postal codes.

“How a lot can anonymization methods contribute in direction of rendering private data now not private? I believe that is a extremely essential challenge and I believe we’re going to see increasingly more of it as data turns into worthwhile and essential to not solely authorities choice making however the personal sector,” he stated. 

Implications for related instances

B.C. was the primary province to begin the litigation course of, however each different province has since launched related cost-recovery instances towards the tobacco trade.

The B.C. Attraction Court’s choice differed from a 2016 ruling by the New Brunswick Court of Attraction that refused to launch uncooked health-care data to tobacco firms.

Rob Cunningham, a lawyer for the Canadian Most cancers Society, stated that after years of delays, it is essential that these instances get to trial.

“If Exxon precipitated an oil spill off the coast of British Columbia, they might have to pay the price of cleanup. They might be accountable,” he stated.

“The tobacco trade, they engaged in an enormous cover-up of the health results. They did not put health warnings on packages for many years. They’d deceptive promoting and, because of their actions, extra individuals smoked and began to smoke than in any other case would have been the case and there is a value to that.”

In 2015, a Quebec Superior Court choose made historical past by ordering three tobacco firms to pay $15 billion in damages in a class-action case introduced ahead by Quebec people who smoke.

A spokesperson for Rothmans Benson & Hedges, Philip Morris Worldwide’s affiliate in Canada, stated the corporate would remark after the choice.



Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

5 + six =