This case is indeed worrisome. I will not get into the issue of freedom of the press, but rather, as you requested, will talk about the protection of privacy, of a journalist or of any other person.
First of all, it was metadata from this journalist that was obtained under a court order. In the Spencer case, a warrant had been obtained. So one of the conditions for the protections set out in that decision appears to have been met.
The question this raises is the following, in my opinion. There was reference earlier to certain police forces that would like to be able to obtain such data without a warrant. In the present case, the metadata were obtained with a warrant and we can question the appropriateness of this.
That leads me to suggest that you reflect on the following. Even if the courts are involved, does Parliament not have a role to play in establishing the criteria that a judge must apply before giving permission for metadata to be obtained? Freedom of the the press would certainly be one of those criteria. We can consider issues relating to the balance among various interests. What is the importance of the crime under investigation? Are the metadata obtained sensitive in nature or not?
It is one thing to say that the courts are involved and that this is a good start, but this case leads me to believe that this is not sufficient. It would probably be helpful to give the courts tools so they can more effectively exercise their powers in such cases.