I can talk about a very recent case. A few years ago, actually, the OPC made a finding with respect to Meta and the Cambridge Analytica scandal. The commissioner issued its report of findings a few years ago. Meta disagreed with those findings and took the OPC to court on those. The OPC lost at Federal Court. The Federal Court actually sided with Meta to say that the OPC had not discharged its investigative burden and had not presented its evidence.
Now, I'll just make a connection here to what my colleague said. Again, because they're not showing any deference to the Privacy Commissioner, it's a de novo proceeding. This would not be the case with a tribunal, which would have to accept the commissioner's finding of fact unless there were a palpable error.
That decision was appealed by the Privacy Commissioner last summer. We're still waiting for a decision from the Federal Court of Appeal. I think we can assume that the decision would be appealed to the Supreme Court as well, because of the parties involved. It's going to take years to get to a final resolution.
Again, that would not be the case in this new system, where a tribunal's decisions are final and can only be judicially reviewed, which is a much narrower standard of review and which means it's much more difficult to make the case. The parties would know that and again, to echo my colleague's comments, would therefore perhaps be more motivated to pursue alternative dispute resolution mechanisms or compliance agreements.