In Injury Disputes, Your Metadata Is Level playing field

Anything you do or state may be used versus you in the court of law. Increasingly, this includes what you may have shared online.


Over the last couple of years, as sharing of personal details on social media has ended up being more common, many injury cases in Ontario are being decided on evidence collected from plaintiffs’ social networks accounts, which supply ‘metadata’ producing a time and location stamp of a user’s online activity. And it’s all permissible as proof in court.

Vital to the admission of this type of proof is what social media now represents– a public forum where users freely share details of their personal lives and personal opinions. When a remark, status upgrade, tweet or image is posted, it has gone public and it never actually goes away, after you conceal or erase it.

Whether the offender is an employer fighting a case of wrongful dismissal or an insurance company rejecting an injury claim, they will typically count on their online search engine and keep track of a complainant’s social media activity, cross-referencing the information of their legal claims with the material and timing of their online activity to revoke or refute them. This is particularly the case if posts are made during a court proceeding.

This is what occurred in Frangione v Vandongen et al., where the complainant was suing for damages developing out of injuries– terrible brain injury, neck and neck and back pain and headaches– sustained in 2 different car accidents. The offender sought to access the entire contents of the plaintiff’s desktop computer, including any product contained on his Facebook account.

The complainant insisted that submitting access to his Facebook profile– and the interactions to third contained within– was a breach of personal privacy, while the offender cited precedent to say the contents of a complaintant’s social networking profile pertained to the case and that sending those files was a practice that was “beyond debate.”.

In the end, the plaintiff was purchased to maintain and produce “all material contained on his Facebook site consisting of any postings, correspondence and photographs approximately and consisting of any postings, correspondence and photographs,” up to and including the date of the order.

Since this is becoming a significantly typical legal strategy in Ontario courts, a harder concern emerges over whether social networks material can be thought about reputable proof.

After all, social networks profiles are generally used to show a public profile that shows exactly what we opt to share with our friends and followers. To have a photo or post be translated as a sign of your actual state of being is highly speculative.

Judges now require proof of significance before buying complainants to send social networks products. In a recent choice in Merpaw v. Hyde, Justice Rick Leroy denied the defendant’s discovery motion to overturn a refusal to supply a private Facebook account by the Plaintiff, who claimed “a decreased pleasure of life, incapacitation from employment, chronic tiredness and anxiety” resulting from a trip and fall injury.

In his decision, Justice Leroy pointed out “minimal probative value in this information to the issues of pleasure,” and was “uncertain on the inferences that can be drawn from usage analysis.”.

But as a standard practice, you need to always be acutely aware of how your social media profile shows your scenarios, particularly as interpreted in a court of law.

Know how your profile appears to employers, insurance providers or any party that might use your personal information shared on a public online forum versus you.

If you are involved in a court conflict, your lawyer ought to encourage you to carry out a comprehensive scrape of your online presence prior to and throughout the procedures, and highlight any potential red flags that might be used as evidence versus you. Feel free to contact Wrongful death lawyer Orange county for more advice

Above all, don’t post brand-new material that you may regret later. Ask yourself: “do I really have to publish this now?”.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *