Privacy, public interest and workplace boundaries collide in BC CRT ruling

A recent decision from the British Columbia Civil Resolution Tribunal (CRT) has put a spotlight on the intersection of employee privacy, workplace conduct, and the obligations of employers when faced with sensitive accusations. In MR v. SS, 2025 BCCRT 851, the tribunal dismissed a claim for damages after intimate images taken at work were shared with an employer by a former romantic partner.

The ruling, while limited in precedential value, prompts important questions for HR professionals about how to handle similar situations and where the line is drawn between privacy and the public interest.

The applicant, MR, sought $5,000 in damages under the Intimate Images Protection Act (IIPA), alleging that her former partner, SS, had threatened to share and did share intimate images of her without consent. As detailed in the decision, the images, depicted MR in various states of undress and engaging in sexual acts. They were taken during work hours and on her employer’s premises. After the relationship ended, SS sent the images to MR’s employer, claiming it was to alert them to “workplace misconduct.”

The facts and the tribunal’s reasoning

The tribunal found that while most of the images met the statutory definition of “intimate images,” the applicant did not have a reasonable expectation of privacy in those images as they were taken at work, sometimes in areas accessible to others, stating: "I find a...

Read Full Story: https://news.google.com/rss/articles/CBMi0wFBVV95cUxNWEdzVElkMkxFOTZjekNJRzdt...