Call Us Now


Is Employee Data Saved on an Employer-Owned Handheld Device or Computer Confidential?

Posted On: January, 21 2015

This blog considers the implications that a recent criminal law decision may have for employment law. It is not often that criminal law and employment law intersect, but a recent evidentiary issue decided by the Court of Appeal for Ontario could have significant implications for employment law cases dealing with dismissals for cause or misconduct.

In the recent decision of  R. v. Cole, 2011 ONCA 218 (CanLII), the Court of Appeal considered the case of a Sudbury high-school teacher who was charged with possession of child pornography and unauthorized use of a computer contrary to the Criminal Code.

The teacher had saved illegal images on a laptop that was provided to him by his employer and which the employer owned. When the teacher’s laptop was serviced by a school board computer technician, the technician discovered child pornography on the laptop, including images of a student at the school where the teacher worked. The technician reported the images to the school, which notified the school board, and eventually the police became involved. The police never obtained a search warrant to access the images that were stored on the laptop. Instead, the police proceeded on the basis that the employer’s permission to search the images was sufficient authority.

The trial judge excluded the images from evidence on the basis that they were obtained by a warrantless search contrary to section 8 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The trial judge found that the accused had a reasonable expectation of privacy concerning personal documents saved on the work laptop. The trial judge decided to exclude the evidence on the basis that the evidence was obtained in a manner that breached the accused person’s right to be free from unreasonable search and seizure.

The Summary Judgment Appeals Judge reversed the Trial Court’s decision to exclude the evidence. This decision was appealed to the Ontario Court of Appeal. The Court of Appeal took a contextual approach in determining whether a reasonable expectation of privacy existed, noting the following factors:

  • the laptop was a work computer owned by the school board
  • the computer was issued for employment purposes with access to the school network
  • the school board gave the teachers possession of the laptops
  • explicit permission was given to use the laptops for personal use
  • permission was given to take the computers home on evenings, weekends and summer vacation
  • teachers used their computers for personal use, they employed passwords to exclude others from their laptops, and they stored personal information on their hard drives
  • there was no clear and unambiguous policy to monitor, search or police the teachers’ use of their laptops

It is important to note that the Court of Appeal did not find that either the school or the school board had breached the accused person’s section 8 rights – only that the police had breached his rights.

In the R. v. Cole decision, the Court of Appeal has clearly stated that in the right circumstances employees can have a reasonable expectation of privacy in the information stored on employer-owned devices. Mere ownership of a device does not automatically entitle the employer or the police to search personal information that may be stored on the device.


Contact Us



  • Rating: 5 Lawyer Toronto - 5 Star Reviews
    Pinto James Reviewed by SB

    "I just wanted to let you know how happy I am with the outcome and how very grateful I am for the guidance and support that you and your team provided.
  • Rating: 5 Lawyer Toronto - 5 Star Reviews
    Pinto James Reviewed by Google user

    "Patrick James is really a great lawyer who is smart and great to deal with. He's been our litigation counsel for over 5 years on several different matters. Patrick recently gave our company great strategic advice that resulted in a big commercial litigation win for our company. He's fierce, tenacious, and really cares about getting the best outcome for his clients."
  • Rating: 5 Lawyer Toronto - 5 Star Reviews
    Pinto James Reviewed by Google user

    "Patrick is a very good lawyer. He recently successfully defended a lawsuit against my company and has pursued several litigation claims for us in the past. All claims settled input favour. Mr. James is smart and quickly gives you great strategic advice. Patrick has been a real asset to our business."
  • Rating: 5 Lawyer Toronto - 5 Star Reviews
    Pinto James Reviewed by Sandra L.

    "Andrew Wray and Patrick James recently helped settle a difficult situation for me and my family. The results were exactly what we were hoping for. They are honest, strategic and will provide you with the best advice for you and your financial situation. I highly recommend them to everyone I know."
  • Rating: 5 Lawyer Toronto - 5 Star Reviews
    Pinto James Reviewed by Mark C.

    "Their team is highly focused and incredibly professional - from our experience it would be difficult not to believe that Pinto Wray James are one of Ontario's leading Firms in Labor and Employment law. The mindful client care and complete understanding of the case eased fears and the stress that comes with any legal dispute. Expect to find high level smartly crafted legal solutions at Pinto Wray James LLP - couldn't recommend more."
  • Rating: 5 Lawyer Toronto - 5 Star Reviews
    Pinto James Reviewed by Sherry C.

    "Patrick is knowledgeable, strategic, supportive, and patient. His guidance and advice helped me to maintain focus and to keep things in perspective. His experience and keen perception provides him with an edge that allows him to assess the situation, the people involved, and to offer a strategic resolution that works best for all involved. If you ever require legal advice and assistance, I highly recommend him and his team. They will be there 100% for you."
  • Rating: 5 Lawyer Toronto - 5 Star Reviews
    Pinto James Reviewed by Christian V.

    "Patrick is a fearless advocate for diverse clients. His strategic approach, and his empathy, are what set him apart as a litigator, and champion of the underdog."
  • Rating: 5 Lawyer Toronto - 5 Star Reviews
    Pinto James Reviewed by A Google User

    "I have no hesitation recommending Andrew Wray of Pinto Wray James LLP. He provided me with legal advice regarding an employment law issue and his council was practical and honest. Andrew's approach is very much one of blending legal excellence with good common sense. An excellent lawyer!"
  • Rating: 5 Lawyer Toronto - 5 Star Reviews
    Pinto James Reviewed by Larry S.

    "Patrick listens to his clients and shows compassion, empathy and professionalism. He cares deeply that the individual that has been wrongfully terminated gets the best judgment available to him. I would not hesitate in recommending him to friends or family."