The Case Of Jones V. Tsige

1932 Words8 Pages
The case of Jones v. Tsige, 2012 ONCA 32 was a way for the law to see that law does indeed need to change with society. It deals with tort law and the right of action for intrusion upon seclusion existing in Ontario. It is based on personal privacy and the court heard that the defendant (Tsige) viewed the plaintiff’s (Jones) personal banking records 174 times within a four-year window. The plaintiff and the defendant did not personally know each other but worked at different branches of the Bank of Montreal in Ontario. The plaintiff was in a common-law relationship with the defendant’s ex-husband. When the plaintiff pursued litigation, the judge dismissed it because there was no existence of a tort invasion of privacy in Ontario at that…show more content…
Going through these three prerequisites; (1) the defendant did in fact know what she was doing, so the act was intentional; (2) the defendant had no lawful justification for looking through the plaintiff’s private banking records; and (3) any reasonable person would feel the way the plaintiff did if someone they did not know was looking into their bank records 174 times in a four-year period. The court also ruled that in order for a case to qualify under intrusion upon seclusion, the act must have been deliberate and significant (again, the defendant knew what she was doing, and did it 174 times). Many people are not on board with this being recognized as “the limits set by the court aren’t clearly definitive” (Gardiner, 2012). One quote that truly shows how this tort being recognized is good news is this: “The term legalization is used to describe the process by which norms are moved from the social to the legal level. Not all social norms become law, in fact, only certain norms, but not others are chosen to be incorporated into the criminal code. Austin T. Turk suggests that there are certain social forces involved in the legalization and creation of legal norms: moral indignation, a high value on order, response to threat, and political tactics.” (Steven Vago, 2009).
Referencing back to the Charter of

More about The Case Of Jones V. Tsige

Get Access