Language selection

Search

Backgrounder: Jurisdictional comparison: Privacy protections

Figure 1: Jurisdictional comparison: Privacy protections
Jurisdictional comparison: Privacy protections
  European Union
(GDPR)
United Kingdom New Zealand Australia California Alberta British Columbia Quebec
(Bill 64)
Canada
(Bill C-11)
Coming into force/last major update 2018 2018 2020 2018 2020 2014 2004 2020
(introduced)
2020
(introduced)
Defining privacy as a human right Yes Yes Yes Yes No No No Yes No
Individual knowledge and understanding Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No
Accountability: compliance with the law as objective standard Yes Yes Yes Yes N/A Yes Yes Yes No
Audit: proactive to verify compliance* Φ Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes No Yes No
Administrative monetary penalties: broad list of violations Yes Yes N/A Yes Yes N/A N/A Yes No
Absence of appeal before privacy-specific tribunal Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No
Broad discretion to decline/discontinue complaints* Φ Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No
Full discretion for public education and guidance Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes N/A No
Codes approval: under DPA procedures Yes Yes Yes Yes N/A No N/A N/A No
Trans-border: specific provisions Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes No Yes No
* MP Nathaniel Erskine-Smith introduced Bill C-413 (42nd Parliament) to provide the OPC with these authorities.
Φ Proposed by Justice Canada in Respect, Accountability, Adaptability: A discussion paper on the modernization of the Privacy Act (November 2020).

Alternate versions

Report a problem or mistake on this page
Error 1: No selection was made. You must choose at least 1 answer.
Please select all that apply (required):

Note

Date modified: