Commissioner considers jurisdiction over use of personal information by bank subsidiary

PIPEDA Case Summary #2002-98

[Section 30(1)]


An individual objected to the fact that a securities company, a subsidiary of a bank, required a photocopy of his driver's license for identification purposes when he changed investment advisors, in spite of the fact that he had recently provided his Social Insurance Number for that reason.

Summary of Investigation

The investigation in this case was limited to the Commissioner's determination of whether or not he had jurisdiction in the matter.

Commissioner's Findings

Issued October 22, 2002

Jurisdiction: : As of January 1, 2001, PIPEDA applies to any federal work, undertaking, or business. Banks are federal works, undertakings, or businesses as defined in the Act. In this case, however, the securities company, though a subsidiary of a bank, operates as a separate and distinct legal entity and is provincially regulated. The company in question is not currently subject to the Act.

The Commissioner concluded that he lacked jurisdiction to investigate the matter.

Report a problem or mistake on this page
Please select all that apply (required): Error 1: This field is required.


Date modified: