Anti-Spam (CASL) Compliance

Compliance with Canada’s Anti-Spam Legislation (CASL) has become critical in light of several major fines and the coming private right of action, which is expected to subject businesses to the risk of class action litigation.

Businesses have seen significant penalties under CASL, including:

• Compu-Finder – $1.1 million
• Plenty of Fish – $48,000
• Porter Airlines – $150,000
• Rogers Communications – $200,000

The businesses were investigated and, rather than face a penalty, agreed to pay the listed amounts and develop compliance programs. The exception is Compu-Finder, which was investigated and fined $1.1 million.

Starting in July of 2017, persons who believe they are affected by a violation of the anti-spam provision of CASL may apply to a court for damages, including statutory damages of up to “$200 for each contravention [ . . . ] not exceeding $1 million for each day on which a contravention occurred.” This is anticipated to be a significant source of class action litigation.

Canada’s Anti-Spam Legislation (CASL) has been in effect since July 1, 2014. CASL is widely regarded as the strictest and most demanding anti-spam legislation in the world.

This guide explains the anti-spam provisions of CASL and identifies some of the key issues that individuals and business need to be aware of, including:

• How to identify Commercial Electronic Messages (CEMs)
• How to obtain proper consent (express or implied) from recipients that are receiving CEMs from you or your organization
• How to meet the specific informational and unsubscribe obligations that are required under CASL

If you would like the MLT Aikins CASL Compliance Guide and Checklist, please complete the form below. You will receive an email with download instructions.

IMPORTANT NOTICE:
Before we can act for you, we must conduct a conflicts check. Please do not send us any confidential information. We do not guarantee the confidentiality of any communications. Unsolicited information may not be treated as confidential and will not be protected by solicitor-client privilege.