Paid Search Engine Tools, LLC v. Google Canada Corporation, 2019 FC 559
Justice Phelan - 2019-05-01
Read full decision. Automatically generated summary:
This is a motion for a “Protective Order” on terms in a draft order and for an extension of time for the exchange of affidavits of documents. The motion is opposed by the Plaintiff as to a Protective Order but not with respect to an extension of time. Unlike some of the recent cases involving consensual protective orders, this is a contested motion which underscores the rationale for such protective orders. For the reasons to follow, this motion is granted in part. The basic requirement for the issuance of a Protective Order has been established but there remain some issues of the terms of the proposed Protective Order that must be addressed. ... There are some significant gaps with the implied undertaking particularly in cases like the current one. The basis of the implied undertaking, as a common law rule not codified in the Federal Courts Rules, creates some uncertainty as to its scope. It is also a principle that continues to develop and may differ across jurisdictions. The application of the implied undertaking to the parties does not address all the consequences that may flow from using the information for legitimate purposes. This is particularly important in respect of third parties (such as witnesses and experts who are not parties) and internally within the opposing organizations. Further, the matter of enforcement and the Court’s ability to control behaviour is not settled unless the terms are encased in an order.
Decision relates to:
- T-40-18 - PAID SEARCH ENGINE TOOLS, LLC v. GOOGLE CANADA CORPORATION ET AL