E-TIPS

In June 2026, the Privacy Commissioner of Canada joined his G7 Data Protection and Privacy Authorities (the “G7 DPAs”) counterparts for their sixth annual roundtable. The discussions focused on strengthening international cooperation to support responsible innovation while protecting individuals’ privacy in the digital environment.

On June 19, 2026, the Federal Court (the Court) released its decision in Enteractive Media Inc. v Gamechanger Media, Inc., 2026 FC 843, dismissing a motion by Enteractive Media Inc. (the Applicant) for leave to file new evidence. The underlying application was an appeal from a decision by the Registrar of Trademarks expunging the Applicant’s GAMECHANGERZ trademark for failing to provide evidence of use.

On June 25, 2026, the Federal Court (the Court) released its decision in Constellation Brands U.S. Operations, Inc. v Vineyard House, LLC, 2026 FC 866, dismissing Constellation Brands U.S. Operations, Inc.’s (Constellation) motion for leave to file additional evidence in its appeal from a decision of the Trademarks Opposition Board (TMOB). The Court held that the proposed evidence did not meet the new leave test under subsection 56(5) of the Trademarks Act, as set out in Products Unlimited, Inc. v Five Seasons Comfort Limited, 2026 FC 48 (as previously reported by the E-TIPS® Newsletter here).

On June 15, 2026, Canada took a major step towards overhauling its federal privacy legislation with the tabling of Bill C-36, an Act to enact the Protecting Privacy and Consumer Data Act, to amend the Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act and to make amendments to other Acts (Bill C-36). Bill C-36 proposes to modernize Canda’s private sector privacy framework through introducing, among other things, (i) a new privacy law that replaces key provisions of the present federal private sector law; (ii) a new regulator to oversee compliance; and (iii) more obligations for regulated entities. Bill C-36 is currently at its second reading in the House of Commons.

On June 3, 2026, the Canadian Centre for Cyber Security (the Centre) released a cyber threat bulletin (the Bulletin) outlining cyber threats facing individuals and organizations during the FIFA World Cup 2026 (the World Cup). The Centre notes that the tournament’s global visibility and broad attack surface, including digital systems, involved businesses and supply-chain partners, make it a high-profile target for cybercriminals and state-sponsored actors.

On May 28, 2026, the Government of Canada launched a public engagement (the Engagement) on how to strengthen and modernize Canada's geographical indications (GI) regime under the Trademarks Act. The Engagement primarily considers the expansion of eligible product categories.

On June 4, 2026, Canada released its National Artificial Intelligence Strategy titled “AI for All” (the Strategy). The Strategy aims to encourage and support the adoption of AI across Canadian businesses and public services, strengthen Canadian controlled AI-infrastructure and protect Canadians.

On May 19, 2026, the Federal Court of Canada (the Court) issued its decision in Green Gourmand Foods Inc. v Canada Bread Company, Limited, 2026 FC 489, dismissing Canada Bread Company Ltd.’s (Canada Bread) motion to strike the new evidence submitted by Green Gourmand Foods Inc. (Green Gourmand) from the record.

On June 4, 2026, the Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada (OPC) tabled its 2025-2026 Annual Report to Parliament on the federal Privacy Act and the Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act (PIPEDA), titled “Championing Privacy in the Age of AI” (the Annual Report). The Annual Report highlights the OPC’s efforts to promote children’s privacy and provide leadership in a time when technologies are developing rapidly.

On May 5, 2026, the Federal Court of Appeal (FCA) issued its decision in Therme Development (CY) Ltd. v. Nordik Spa Village Chelsea Inc., 2026 FCA 85, dismissing Therme Development (CY) Ltd.’s (Therme’s) appeal of a Federal Court (FC) decision to strike certain services listed in association with Therme’s trademark registrations for THEREME, THERME GROUP, and certain THERME composite marks (i.e., with both a word and a design element) (the Composite Marks).

On May 4, 2026, the Privacy Commissioner of Canada (the Commissioner) released two new guidance documents on age assurance: (1) directed at operators of websites and online services; and (2) directed at providers and developers of age assurance systems (collectively, the Guidance Documents). The Guidance Documents are intended to support organizations in creating safer and more age-appropriate online experiences for children while mitigating potential adverse impacts on privacy.

On May 5, 2026, the Federal Court (the Court) released its decision in GRC Food Services Ltd. v. Chocoladefabriken Lindt & Sprüngli AG, 2026 FC 594, allowing GRC Food Services Ltd.’s (GRC’s) appeal of the Trademark Opposition Board’s (TMOB’s) refusal to register its MASTER CHOCOLAT trademark (the GRC Mark).

On May 6, 2026, the Privacy Commissioners of Canada, Quebec, British Columbia and Alberta (collectively, the Commissioners) released findings from a joint investigation into OpenAI’s collection, use and disclosure of Canadians’ personal information in developing and operating ChatGPT. The Commissioners concluded that the manner in which OpenAI initially trained early ChatGPT models, including GPT 3.5 and GPT-4, did not comply with applicable federal and provincial privacy laws.

On April 23, 2026, the Office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner of Ontario (IPC) released PHIPA Decision 334 (the Decision), in which the IPC issued its second administrative monetary penalty (AMP) under Ontario’s Personal Health Information Protection Act (PHIPA).

On April 24, 2026, the Federal Court (FC) in Nielsen Consumer LLC v Toronto-Dominion Bank, 2026 FC 549, granted leave to file new evidence and reinstated Nielsen Consumer LLC’s (Nielsen) TDLINX registration. The registration had been expunged after Nielsen failed to respond to a section 45 notice issued at the request of Toronto-Dominion Bank (TD).

Neurotechnology is rapidly moving from clinical laboratories into everyday consumer life. Devices capable of monitoring, interpreting, and potentially influencing neural activity are no longer speculative; they are already marketed for wellness, productivity, and entertainment. As these technologies proliferate, so too does the collection of neural data, which may reveal deeply personal aspects of cognition, emotion, and behaviour. Regulators across jurisdictions have begun reacting to this changing landscape, with several attempting to classify neural data within existing privacy frameworks or create new legal categories altogether.

On April 2, 2026, the Government of Canada announced its launch of the review of Canada’s Federal Privacy Act (the “Act”). Enacted in 1983, the Act governs how federal institutions handle personal information. However, despite over four decades of technological advancements and shifts in how personal data is collected and used, the Act has not been substantially updated since it came into force.

In an era where a selfie doubles as a biometric identifier, privacy law’s goals of technological neutrality are being challenged in its applicability to modern data collection practices. Precedent setting litigation across Canada surrounding Clearview AI’s data scraping practices have revealed the issues in governing rapidly evolving technologies that vastly change the data collection landscape under existing legal frameworks.

On April 14, 2026, the Federal Court of Appeal (the FCA) issued its decision in McCain Foods Limited v. J.R. Simplot Company, 2026 FCA 71, dismissing McCain Foods Limited’s (McCain’s) appeal alleging that the Federal Court erred in its construction of the term “high electric field” when concluding that McCain’s Canadian Patent No. 2,412,841 (the ‘841 Patent) was not infringed by its French fry industry competitors, J.R. Simplot Company and Simplot Canada (II) Limited (collectively, Simplot).

On April 14, 2026, the Federal Court of Canada (the Court) released its decision in Federation of Asian Canadians Toronto v. Asialicious Holdings Inc., 2026 FC 495, finding that the Federation of Asian Canadians Toronto (FACT) established passing off of its trademark ASIALICIOUS (the Mark) by the Federation of Chinese Canadians in Markham (FCCM), Asialicious Holdings Inc., and the Chinese Cuisine & Hospitality Association of Canada (CCHAC) (collectively, the Defendants).