Top court rules against tobacco firm in health data privacy case
British Columbia does not have to give a tobacco company access to detailed provincial health databases to help it mount a defence in a multibillion-dollar damages trial, the Supreme Court of Canada has ruled.
In a unanimous decision Friday, the high court said the province cannot legally allow Philip Morris International to see raw data from the information banks.
The ruling is the latest development in a 17-yearold effort by B.C. to recoup smoking-related health-care expenditures from tobacco companies.
It could have a countrywide ripple effect, as all 10 provinces have filed legal suits seeking a total of more than $120 billion in damages from tobacco firms.
B.C. had argued that allowing wholesale access to individuallevel health files - even with personal identifiers removed - could unduly compromise privacy.
Philip Morris took exception and successfully challenged the province’s stance in the B.C. Supreme Court. The decision was upheld by the B.C. Court of Appeal, prompting the province
to take its case to the Supreme Court of Canada.
In its decision, B.C.’s appeal court said there was no serious threat to personal privacy in allowing access to the anonymized data.
The Supreme Court of Canada disagreed, pointing to privacy safeguards in B.C. legislation that paved the way for court action against tobacco firms.
The legislation allows for the use of statistical and researchbased
information to help advance the case and determine the amount of damages.
The B.C. databases at issue are compilations of individual health-care records on particular individuals along with details of medical services and prescription drug use.
Instead of providing the data, the province proposed a compromise that would give Philip Morris International and other companies restricted access through an agreement
with Statistics Canada.
Philip Morris objected, saying it needed unfettered access to the anonymized, individuallevel data to assess its quality as well as the reliability of calculations based on the information.
The Supreme Court of Canada said that disclosure of such information - even after names are deleted - is barred by a provision of the B.C. legislation protecting “health care records and documents of particular