Careful what you disclose: Court recognizes a new privacy tort for Nova Scotia
Nova Scotia has taken a big step forward in recognizing the tort of publication of private facts. The case, Racki v Racki, 2021 NSSC 46 comes hot on the heels of Ontario’s recent recognition of the new common law tort of internet harassment which we previously discussed. The Nova Scotia case arose in the context of an acrimonious divorce and custody dispute.
The ex-husband self-published a book about how he overcame hardship to become a successful entrepreneur. The book was widely promoted on his various social media platforms and was available for download.
The book also disclosed incidentally that his former wife had been addicted to sleeping pills and attempted suicide twice. These statements were true so they didn’t defame her, and the Charter’s right to privacy does not apply to common law disputes between individuals. Undeterred, she commenced an action for damages on the basis of public disclosure of private facts about her.
This cause of action has been recognized in the U.S., and a few cases in the United Kingdom and New Zealand but to date in Canada, there has been no definitive recognition of the action. On occasion, publication is discussed as an aggravating factor going to damages in the nascent tort of “intrusion upon seclusion”.
Recognition and elements of the tort
Justice Coughlan accepted that a tort exists in Nova Scotia for publication of private facts. At paragraphs 25 and 26, he explains the basis and articulates the test:
 Today a person’s privacy is a precious commodity which is becoming harder to protect. Modern life infringes on all aspects of personal privacy. Technology, which changes rapidly, has made it possible to track all aspects of a person’s life. We live in a world much different from just a decade or two ago. As society changes the law must evolve to meet changing circumstances. Existing causes of action, such as defamation with the defences available to such a claim, do not address the circumstances arising from the public disclosure of private facts. Considering all of the foregoing, it is appropriate to find the existence in Nova Scotia of the right of action for public disclosure of private facts of another.
 The elements of the tort are: (a) There must be publicity of the facts communicated to the public at large to become a matter of public knowledge; (b) The facts are those to which there is a reasonable expectation of privacy; and (c) The publicity given to those private facts must be considered, viewed objectively, as highly offensive to a reasonable person causing distress, humiliation or anguish.
The court’s findings
Acknowledging the right to privacy has to be weighed against other interests such as freedom of expression, the judge was influenced by what he perceived as the malicious inclusion of unnecessary facts to the subject-matter of the book:
 The right to privacy is not absolute. It has to be weighed against competing rights including freedom of expression. In this case Mr. Racki has the right to publish a book to encourage entrepreneurship and overcome hardship. But the issue in considering the Book as a whole, is whether the publication of the private facts of Ms. Racki’s addiction and suicide attempts is in the public interest.
 Considering the purpose of the Book, the publication of the facts of Ms. Racki’s addiction and suicide attempts was not in the public interest, in that the facts were not required to advance the purpose of the Book about overcoming hardships and starting a business. Mr. Racki could have stated his relationship with his wife was falling apart without disclosing the facts his wife was addicted to sleeping pills and attempted suicide. Given the facts of this case Mr. Racki’s right to freedom of expression does not prevail over Ms. Racki’s privacy claim.
In the result, Justice Coughlan ordered an injunction to remove the offending portions of the book and awarded the wife $18,000 in general damages and $10,000 in aggravated damages as the publication was found to be motivated by actual malice. The court rejected her claim for punitive damages.
The increasing importance placed on privacy and the facts of this case demanded a remedy. However, the judicial weighing of the purpose of the expression and the public interest in the subject-matter bears watching to see how far this tort will be extended.
This update is intended for general information only. If you have questions about the above, please contact a member of our Media, Advertising & Marketing group.
By Daniela Bassan, K.C. Daniela Bassan, K.C. is a Partner and Practice Group Chair at the law firm of Stewart McKelvey (Canada) where she focuses on intellectual property and complex, multi-jurisdictional dispute resolution. The premise…Read More
By Conor O’Neil and Maria Cummings On May 9, 2023, two bills were introduced in the New Brunswick Legislature that could have material affects on the construction industry. Bills 41 and 42, of the current…Read More
Author Sara Espinal Henao, an Immigration Lawyer in our Halifax office, will be speaking on a related panel, Labour Market Impact Assessments Overview and Current Trends, at the upcoming CBA Immigration Law Conference in Ottawa,…Read More
Author Brendan Sheridan, an Immigration Lawyer in our Halifax Office, will be running a related webinar on May 30, 2023, Avoiding immigration bloopers: A webinar for the film & television industry, in partnership with Screen…Read More
Whose information is it anyway? Implications of the York University decision on public and private sector privacy and confidentiality
Included in Discovery: Atlantic Education & the Law – Issue 12 By Charlotte Henderson Privacy and confidentiality requirements are some of the most important responsibilities of organizations today. An organization’s ability to properly manage information,…Read More
Included in Discovery: Atlantic Education & the Law – Issue 12 By Hilary Newman & Jacob Zelman A non-disclosure agreement, or “NDA”, is a legal contract in which two or more persons agree to keep the…Read More
By Graham Haynes & Isaac McLellan Introduction The Canadian federal budget was unveiled on Tuesday, March 28, 2023 (“Budget 2023”)1 , and proposes significant changes to the General Anti-Avoidance Rule (the “GAAR”) in Canadian tax…Read More
When closed doors make sense: Court dismisses challenge to university board’s procedure for in camera discussions
Included in Discovery: Atlantic Education & the Law – Issue 12 By Scott Campbell, Jennifer Taylor, Folu Adesanya A long-standing dispute over governance practices at the Cape Breton University Board of Governors was recently resolved…Read More
Included in Discovery: Atlantic Education & the Law – Issue 12 By Jon O’Kane & Emma Douglas These days it seems no one is immune from the threat of anonymous keyboard warriors posting untrue and…Read More
Included in Discovery: Atlantic Education & the Law – Issue 12 By Dante Manna Once known for recreational use, psychedelics are slowly gaining medical legitimacy as research emerges on possible therapeutic benefits for mental health…Read More