In a controversial decision, a Canadian civil court has thrown out a woman's claim for compensation after her ex-partner shared nude photos of her to her workplace. The British Columbia Civil Resolution Tribunal decided that the behavior was in the "public interest," particularly given that the pictures were snapped at her place of work during working hours and in publicly visible spaces. The complainant, referred to by the initials “MR,” had filed the case under British Columbia’s Intimate Images Protection Act (IIPA), seeking 5,000 USD in compensation. She alleged that her ex-partner, “SS,” shared the explicit content out of revenge following their breakup.

But Tribunal Member Megan Stewart ordered that the photos did not entirely qualify as "intimate" in the eyes of the law since they were captured in areas of employment open to the public and co-workers.“A person who takes otherwise intimate recordings of themselves at work does not have a reasonable expectation of privacy… whatever the sharer’s motives,” Stewart stated in her ruling.

Workplace Conduct Trumps Private Expectation

The decision stressed that because the pictures were taken on company time and property, it was appropriate that the employer be notified, especially when couched as a reporting of potential workplace impropriety. "Even if the pictures did qualify as intimate under the Act, distributing them to the employer was not beyond what was required in the interests of the public," Stewart added. The court explained that even though people are entitled to expect that personal photographs won't be shared publicly, e.g., on social media or pornographic sites, that expectation doesn't extend when the material involves professional behavior in the workplace.

ALSO READ: Indian Student Jailed For Masturbating On Girl’s Bed and Teddy Bears In UK University

As per court documents, MR acknowledged the photos were taken on work time and in areas such as the front counter, which was public and accessible to other employees. SS is claimed to have forwarded the content to MR's employer, claiming he was informing them of "workplace misconduct." Though MR alleged the true purpose was retaliation for the breakup, the tribunal ruled that SS's action was within the limits of legal disclosure under the IIPA, based on legitimate concern for office ethics.

ALSO READ: Brazilian Tourist Trapped In Indonesia’s Active Volcano For 3 Days, Drone Footage Shows Signs of Life | Watch

Having established both a lack of expectation of privacy and a justification of public interest, the tribunal rejected MR's claim for monetary damages. The decision has initiated debate within legal and workplace communities about the changing meaning of privacy and professionalism in the age of the internet, particularly under legislation such as the IIPA that is designed to protect individuals from unwanted posting of intimate images.