{"id":2049,"date":"2014-05-15T14:55:14","date_gmt":"2014-05-15T18:55:14","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/bf-indemnisation.com\/?p=2049"},"modified":"2021-02-02T15:28:55","modified_gmt":"2021-02-02T20:28:55","slug":"evidence-by-social-networks-with-regard-to-employment-injuries","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/bf-indemnisation.com\/en\/blog\/evidence-by-social-networks-with-regard-to-employment-injuries\/","title":{"rendered":"Evidence by social networks with regard to employment injuries"},"content":{"rendered":"

Since 2001, the Act to Establish a Legal Framework for Information Technology<\/a>1<\/sup>\u00a0regulates the use of technology-based documents as evidence. The use of such documents is increasingly common and this is especially true in the areas of health and safety at work.<\/p>\n

Case law has established that evidence lawfully obtained on social networks such as Facebook, Twitter and LinkedIn does not infringe on privacy. Indeed, what is on Facebook is not part of the private domain2<\/sup>, “considering the multitude of people who can have access to it”(Our translation<\/i>). However, if the information on social networks was obtained by the use of a subterfuge and lies3<\/sup>, if the information was not available for a large number of ” friends” or colleagues4<\/sup> and if private parameters had been chosen, the evidence through social networks could be rejected because the employee had a reasonable expectation of having his privacy respected. However, the photos or comments posted on social networks are generally public and thus admissible5<\/sup>.<\/p>\n

Evidence through social networks can and has been used for various purposes in regards to employment injuries, among others:<\/p>\n

–\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 To contradict the statements of the worker;<\/p>\n

–\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 To harm his credibility (E.g.: biking6<\/sup>, doing aerobics7<\/sup>, or kayaking8<\/sup> when he is denying practicing these activities, denying consuming alcohol when he published proof to the contrary, etc.)<\/p>\n

[49] Because of the worker\u2019s lack of credibility, his testimony is rejected. There is no evidence to conclude that he has suffered an employment injury9<\/sup>.<\/i><\/div>\n

–\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 To find the cause of a health problem (for example, through Facebook conversations, an employer learned that the cause of a worker\u2019s depression was his relationships with other people and not work10<\/sup>;<\/p>\n

–\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 To support claims of workplace harassment11<\/sup>.<\/p>\n

In sum, although social networks provide many interesting social and commercial opportunities, one would be wise to remember and always consider that what is published often falls within the public domain.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\n

 <\/p>\n

\n

1<\/sup>An Act to Establish a Legal Framework for Information Technology, CQLR c. C-1.1
\n2<\/sup>Landry et Provigo Qu\u00e9bec inc. (Maxi & Cie)<\/i>, 2011 QCCLP 1802 (CanLII).
\n3<\/sup>Campeau et Services alimentaires Delta Dailyfood Canada inc., 2012 QCCLP 7666 (CanLII).
\n4<\/sup>Lougheed Imports Ltd. (West Coast Mazda) v. United Food and Commercial Workers International Union, Local 1518<\/i>, 2010 CanLII 62482 (BC LRB).
\n5<\/sup>However, the case law and legal commentary are divided regarding the necessity of proving the authenticity and integrity by distinct evidence. , see Claude FABIEN. \u201cLa preuve par document technologique\u201d (2004) 38 Revue juridique Th\u00e9mis, 533-611.
\n6<\/sup>Brisindi et STM (R\u00e9seau des autobus), 2010 QCCLP 4158 (CanLII).
\n7<\/sup>Costco-Gatineau et Gilbert<\/a>,\u00a02012 QCCLP 5491 (CanLII).
\n8<\/sup>Hollingsworth v. Ottawa Police Services Board<\/i>, [2007] O.J. No. 5134.
\n9<\/sup>Brisindi et STM (R\u00e9seau des autobus), 2010 QCCLP 4158 (CanLII), par. 49.
\n10<\/sup>L\u00e9vesque et Restaurant les Jardins Roussillon, 2011 QCCLP 3890 (CanLII).
\n11<\/sup>Landry et Provigo Qu\u00e9bec inc. (Maxi & Cie)<\/i>, 2011 QCCLP 1802 (CanLII).<\/p>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Since 2001, the Act to Establish a Legal Framework for Information Technology1\u00a0regulates the use of technology-based documents as evidence. The use of such documents is increasingly common and this is especially true in the areas of health and safety at work. Case law has established that evidence lawfully obtained on social networks such as Facebook, […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":10,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[41],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-2049","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-did-you-know"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/bf-indemnisation.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2049","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/bf-indemnisation.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/bf-indemnisation.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/bf-indemnisation.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/10"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/bf-indemnisation.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2049"}],"version-history":[{"count":8,"href":"https:\/\/bf-indemnisation.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2049\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":2451,"href":"https:\/\/bf-indemnisation.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2049\/revisions\/2451"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/bf-indemnisation.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2049"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/bf-indemnisation.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2049"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/bf-indemnisation.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2049"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}