°µÍø½ûÇø

In a press release, the commissioner’s office said Google won't implement the recommendation to de-list specific articles in the search results for the individual’s name. The release said the office "is considering all available options to secure Google’s compliance with the Act."

The case first began in 2017, with Google challenging the application of federal privacy law to its search engine. The privacy commissioner asked the courts to weigh in and in 2023 the Federal Court of Appeal rejected Google’s appeal. The decision marked a victory for people seeking a digital “right to be forgotten� in Canada.

The release Wednesday said the commissioner found that individuals have the right, in "limited circumstances," to have some information delisted, so that it doesn't show up in online searches for their name. 

The right "applies in situations where there is a risk of serious harm to an individual, including, as he has found in this case, a risk of harm to a person’s safety or dignity if certain elements of their personal information continue to be displayed through an online search for their name," it said.

The right applies if "this risk of harm outweighs the public interest in that information remaining accessible through such a search."

The case in question involved articles about a criminal charge that was dropped, which the individual said caused direct harm, including social stigma, lost job opportunities and physical assault. 

The charges relate to an allegation that the individual didn't disclose their HIV status before sexual activity. The commission's report notes the criminal proceedings were stayed shortly afterwards because public health authorities were satisfied the individual didn't pose a current public health risk. It noted federal and several provincial attorneys general "have since confirmed that charges should generally not be laid in circumstances where there is no realistic possibility of HIV transmission."

The commissioner recommended Google de-list the article for searches of that individual's name, though they would continue to be available online and appear in results for other search terms. 

According to Google, the court cases didn't consider questions around the impact on freedom of expression. 

A Google spokesperson said the company is reviewing the report but remains "strongly of the view that consideration of a so-called ‘right to be forgotten’ must be appropriately balanced with the freedom of expression and access to information rights of Canadians, the news media, and other publishers, and therefore should be determined and defined by the courts."

University of Ottawa law professor Teresa Scassa said she expects the next step will be for the privacy commissioner to apply to Federal Court for an order, and then "the arguments about whether there is in fact a right to be forgotten in (the federal privacy law) are going be made before the Federal Court."

There have been long-standing calls to update that law, the Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act. 

Scassa noted the most recent attempt to do that by the Liberal government did include a right to erasure, but Bill C-27 died on the order paper when the federal election was called, and it's not clear if or in what form it will be reintroduced.

A spokesperson for the privacy commissioner said the options the commissioner is considering include court proceedings or "seeking to enter into a compliance agreement."

This report by °µÍø½ûÇø was first published Aug. 27, 2025.