Caroline Deschênes
Lawyer, Partner - Montréal
Caroline Deschênes is a partner in the Montréal office of Langlois Lawyers. Her practice is focused on civil and commercial litigation, with a particular emphasis on class actions, privacy issues, access to information, construction law, product liability and professional liability. She represents various corporations before courts of first instance and appeal in Quebec, and before administrative tribunals. Caroline has acted in several class actions involving the protection of personal information, pharmaceutical liability, consumer law and civil liability. She has also participated in proceedings involving insurers and professionals, including before disciplinary bodies.
Caroline holds the CIPP Certification (Certified Information Privacy Professional / Canada) from the International Association of Privacy Professionals. She is vice-chair of the executive council of the “Privacy and Access” section of the Canadian Bar Association. She also sat on the advisory committee for the review of the Act respecting the protection of personal information in the private sector which gave rise to Bill 64. In the course of her practice involving privacy matters, Caroline advises clients on various issues, including the collection, use, communication, retention, disposal and trans-border transfer of personal information, as well as cyber-security, access to information and electronic communications. She frequently speaks at conferences and continuing legal education seminars on a variety of topics related to these areas. She has been recognized by her peers for her expertise in the protection of personal information.
Before joining Langlois Lawyers, Caroline practiced for 10 years at an international law firm.
Education
LL.M., University of Cambridge, 2006
B.C.L./LL.B., McGill University , 2004
Rankings & Recognitions
- 26 Langlois lawyers recognized in The Canadian Legal Lexpert® Directory 2024
- Best Lawyers in Canada 2024
- Canadian Legal Lexpert® Directory 2023
- The Best Lawyers in Canada 2023
- Canadian Legal Lexpert® Directory 2022
- The Best Lawyers in Canada 2022
John Williamson Frederick Peacock Memorial Scholarship, awarded to a McGill student having a good academic record, in order to pursue graduate studies abroad, 2005
“Great distinction” designation, 2004
Allan Neil Assh Memorial Award, awarded to the student having the highest standing in the Business Associations course, 2004
Osler, Hoskin and Harcourt Prize in corporate and commercial law, awarded to a student who has achieved distinction in the fields of Corporate and Commercial Law, 2004
Hans Hermann Oppenheimer Scholarship, awarded to a student who has shown particular promise in the field of public international law, 2003
Harry Batshaw Prize, awarded to the student having the highest standing in the Foundations of Canadian Law course, 2001
Dean’s Honour List, Faculty of Law, McGill University, 2001-2004
Areas of Practice
- Access to Information
- Class Actions
- Commercial Litigation
- Construction Law
- Construction Litigation
- Cyber-risk Insurance Policy
- Environmental Law
- Environmental Litigation
- General Liability
- Insurance Litigation
- Litigation and Dispute Resolution
- Non-competition Clauses and Restrictive Covenants
- Private International Law
- Product Liability
- Professional Liability
- Real Estate Litigation
Representative Work
Caroline has represented the following clients:
– An international company in a class action arising from a personal information leak following a security incident.
– A Crown corporation in connection with class actions and individual lawsuits based on consumer law.
– Pharmaceutical companies in connection with class actions involving product liability.
– An entity in connection with class actions based on allegations of sexual assault.
– An aeronautical corporation in connection with injunction proceedings where millions of dollars were at stake.
– A petroleum company in connection with numerous commercial disputes, and in environmental and real estate matters.
– Engineering firms in construction law matters and proceedings involving professional liability.
Publications
Articles
- 2022 – Personal information protection: a busy summer
- 2021 – Protection of personal information: Public bodies must also be prepared to meet new requirements
- 2021 – Protection of personal information: Three-year phased implementation after Bill 64 receives assent
- 2021 – White paper on modernizing privacy protection in Ontario
- 2021 – A step towards the right to be forgotten: a developing story
- 2021 – The mobility, use and protection of government digital data
- 2021 – Protection of personal information: main takeaways one year later
- 2021 – Privacy rights at the frontier of the burden of proof of injury
- 2020 – Digital Charter Implementation Act, 2020 (Bill C-11) – Overview of changes to the applicable regime
- 2020 – Privacy protection in Quebec: an overview of amendments to the law governing the private sector
- 2020 – 2020: the year of modifications to the Canadian and Quebec laws on protection of personal information
- 2019 – Being the Victim of an IT Security Breach Is Not Enough to Claim Damages
- 2018 – The New Mandatory Data Breach Reporting Regimes: Four Key Elements
- 2018 – The GDPR: 5 Myths Dispelled
News
Other Publications
2021 – Contributed to the DataGuidance “Quebec: Quebec’s privacy legislation is growing teeth – What businesses need to know before they get bitten” to explain the main aspects of Bill 64 aimed at modernizing Quebec’s legal framework for the protection of personal information.
2021 – Contributed to the DataGuidance “Québec – Data Protection Overview | Guidance Note” with co-author Cynthia Chassigneux.
2019 – “GDPR and Canada’s Privacy Regime: What Are the Differences?”, co-authored with Pascal Archambault, E-newsletter, Soulier avocats, March 2019
2019 – “Cyber-risques: la gestion d’un incident de sécurité” (Cyber-risks: managing a security incident), in Barreau du Québec, Service de la formation continue, co-authored with Jean-François De Rico and Marie-Pier Desmeules, Développements récents en enquêtes internes et réglementaires (2019, vol 457, Montréal (QC), Y. Blais, 2019, 45.
2018 – “Five steps to minimize privacy class action”, Canadian Lawyer, November 5, 2018
2018 – What should Canadian businesses know about GDPR
2018 – Mandatory privacy breach reporting requirements coming into force in Canada November 1st
2017 – The CRTC determines that Canada’s Anti-Spam Legislation is constitutional and reduces the first penalty handed out under the legislation to $200,000
2017 – Draft mandatory data breach reporting regulations released for comment
2016 – “Commentaire sur la décision Lalande c. Compagnie d’arrimage de Québec ltée – La Cour supérieure interprète le nouvel article 221 C.p.c. sur l’interrogatoire préalable” (Commentary on Lalande v. Compagnie d’arrimage de Québec ltée – The Superior Court interprets new Article 221 CCP regarding examinations on discovery), Repères, EYB2016REP2080 (La Référence), Éditions Yvon Blais
2016 – Quebec Superior Court dismisses the first class action tried on the merits in the pharmaceutical area
2016 – “Chronique – Les actions collectives et la vie privée : comment les éviter? ” (Class actions and privacy: how to avoid them?), Repères, EYB2016REP2032 (La Référence), Éditions Yvon Blais
2016 – “Commentaire sur la décision Gagnon c. General Motors of Canada – La suspension d’une demande d’autorisation d’une action collective multiterritoriale en vertu du nouveau Code de procédure civile et la considération de l’intérêt des membres québécois” (Commentary on Gagnon v. General Motors of Canada – staying an application for authorization to institute a multijurisdictional class action under the Code of Civil Procedure and taking into account the interest of the Quebec members), Repères, EYB2016REP2032 (La Référence), Éditions Yvon Blais
2015 – Regulated contracts: Quebec Court of Appeal confirms applicable laws and regulations of public order are not external clauses
2015 – “Commentaire sur la décision Léonard c. Québec (Procureure générale) – Le fait que le recours soit intenté et dirigé par les avocats en demande n’a pas d’impact déterminant sur l’analyse du critère de l’article 1003d) C.p.c. ” (Commentary on Léonard v. Quebec (Attorney General) – The fact a class action is instituted and led by plaintiffs’ counsel does not have a determining impact on the analysis of the criterion set out in Article 1003(d) CCP), Repères, EYB2015REP1637 (La Référence), Éditions Yvon Blais
2014 – “Chronique – L’interrogatoire des membres du groupe : rappel des principes et application jurisprudentielle” (Examination of class members: summary of case-law principles and application), Repères, EYB2014REP1581 (La Référence), Éditions Yvon Blais
2014 – “Commentaire sur la décision Cooperstock c. United Air Lines inc. – La Cour d’appel a de nouveau l’occasion de préciser l’application des articles 54.1 et suivants C.p.c. ” (Commentary on Cooperstock v. United Air Lines inc.), RepèresEYB2014REP1513 (La Référence), Éditions Yvon Blais
2013 – “Commentaire sur la décision Lorrain c. Petro-Canada – La preuve de préjudice statistique dans le cadre d’une demande d’autorisation d’exercer un recours collectif : la Cour d’appel se prononce”, (Commentary on Lorrain v. Petro-Canada), Repères, EYB2013REP1346 (La Référence), Éditions Yvon Blais
2012 – “Chronique – La preuve appropriée au stade de l’autorisation d’exercer un recours collectif : qu’en est-il du rapport d’expertise?” (Appropriate evidence at the class action authorization stage: where does the expert report fit in?), Repères, EYB2012REP1268 (La Référence), Éditions Yvon Blais
Top of the page