Skip to content
Coverage

Unwanted calls

Canada CASL and the National Do Not Call List

NationalCADerived or secondary source

Canada

Rule id
calls.ca-casl
Version
1.0.0
In force from
July 1, 2014
Last read against its sources
August 5, 2026
Countries bound
Canada

In plain language

What this regime says.

Register on the National DNCL, complain within 14 days, and know that CASL's private right of action has been suspended since 2017 and remains so.

Who is covered

People receiving unsolicited marketing calls, texts or faxes on a number in Canada.

What you get

No money. A preference registration that reduces the calls, and a regulator complaint that can lead to a penalty paid to the state.

Where claims go wrong

  • Expecting a per-call payment. That is a United States feature and it does not exist here.
  • Missing the 14-day complaint window. Complain the same day.
The official claim route

Authority

Every citation,
with its pinpoint.

A claim that cites “EU law” gets filed. A claim that cites Article 7(1)(c) gets answered. These are the exact coordinates this entry rests on.
  1. Canada's Anti-Spam Legislation, S.C. 2010, c. 23An Act to promote the efficiency and adaptability of the Canadian economy by regulating certain activities that discourage reliance on electronic means of carrying out commercial activitiesURL verified 2026-08-05ss. 6–11 (commercial electronic messages); ss. 47–51 (private right of action, not in force)

Sources

Where a figure is indexed, converted or published by a regulator rather than fixed in the instrument, the provenance is recorded separately. Anything marked as a modelled estimate is exactly that — a model, not a statutory number.

What it imposes

Clocks, defences and the ladder.

A rule module builds these while it evaluates, because a limitation period depends on which forum is open to you. What follows is the structure this regime produces — deliberately with no dates and no figures, because those belong to your facts rather than to the law.

The clocks it starts

  • Canada: window to report the callThe National DNCL complaint form requires the complaint to be made within 14 days of the call. This is a short window and it is the most common reason a Canadian complaint is rejected. Complain the same day.Canada's Anti-Spam Legislation, S.C. 2010, c. 23 — ss. 6–11 (commercial electronic messages); ss. 47–51 (private right of action, not in force)Referral to the regulator

What it entitles you to, beyond money

  • An enforceable requirement that they stopEvery regime here requires a caller to stop on request, and to identify itself. Send a written objection to any caller you can name, keep the date, and report continued contact — repeat contact after an objection is the breach regulators move on.ss. 6–11 (commercial electronic messages); ss. 47–51 (private right of action, not in force)

What the other side will say

Each of these is a refusal this regime lets a counterparty attempt, paired with the answer to it. Reading them before you write is worth more than any amount of polish on the letter itself.

"It was not us, it was a lead generator"

high likelihood

We did not place that call. It was made by an independent marketing partner and we are not responsible for their conduct.

What answers it

The TCPA reaches calls made "on behalf of" a seller, and the FCC has long held that a seller can be vicariously liable on ordinary federal agency principles — actual authority, apparent authority, or ratification. Ask, in writing, for the identity of the lead generator, the contract governing the campaign, and the record of the consent they say they obtained for your number. A seller that took the sale but disclaims the call has to explain how it accepted the benefit without ratifying the conduct.

"You gave consent on a website"

high likelihood

Our records show you consented to receive marketing calls when you filled in a form on [some website].

What answers it

Then ask for the record. Prior express written consent has to be a signed agreement, identifying the seller, disclosing that signing authorises automated or prerecorded marketing calls to a designated number, and disclosing that signing is not a condition of purchase. Demand the actual capture: the URL, the timestamp, the IP address, the exact disclosure text shown, and the number entered. Very often the record is a purchased lead with none of this, or a number that is not yours.

"We were trying to reach someone else"

medium likelihood

This number was previously held by our customer. We had consent; we simply did not know it had been reassigned.

What answers it

Good faith about a reassigned number is not a defence once you have told them. Every call after your first "stop" or "wrong number" is knowingly made to a non-consenting party, and is the strongest part of your claim. Record the date you first told them.

"We have an established business relationship with you"

medium likelihood

You are an existing customer, so the do-not-call rules do not apply to us.

What answers it

The established-business-relationship exemption to the national registry is time-limited and defeasible: it runs 18 months from your last transaction, or three months from an inquiry, and it evaporates the moment you ask them to stop. It has never been a defence to the separate prohibition on prerecorded marketing calls without prior express written consent.

Where to take it next

  1. Written objection to the callerAsk them to stop, in writing, and to confirm they have removed your number. Ask on what basis they believe they had your consent, and for a copy of it. Keep everything.Claim directtypically 28 days
  2. Complain to the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC)The CRTC enforces both CASL and the Unsolicited Telecommunications Rules, and imposes administrative monetary penalties on senders. Report spam and unwanted calls through the Spam Reporting Centre and the National DNCL complaint form. Penalties go to the Receiver General, not to complainants.Regulatortypically 90 daysofficial page

Documents

What this regime can produce.

Every one of these is a document you send yourself, in your own name. Duesday never writes to anybody on your behalf and is never anyone’s agent.

The same claim type elsewhere

EU ePrivacy Directive and GDPR (direct marketing)EUSupranational — 30 countriesDirective 2002/58/EC (ePrivacy Directive), Art. 13Confidence: mediumUK Privacy and Electronic Communications Regulations 2003GBNational — United KingdomPrivacy and Electronic Communications (EC Directive) Regulations 2003, regs. 19–24 and reg. 30Confidence: mediumConnecticut telephone solicitation statuteUS-CTSub-national — United StatesConn. Gen. Stat. § 42-288aConfidence: lowFlorida Telephone Solicitation ActUS-FLSub-national — United StatesFla. Stat. § 501.059 (Florida Telephone Solicitation Act)Confidence: highIndiana telephone solicitation and autodialer statutesUS-INSub-national — United StatesInd. Code art. 24-4.7 (telephone solicitation) and Ind. Code ch. 24-5-14 (automatic dialing machines)Confidence: lowLouisiana telephone solicitation rulesUS-LASub-national — United StatesLa. R.S. 45:844.11 et seq.Confidence: lowMaryland Telephone Consumer Protection ActUS-MDSub-national — United StatesMd. Code, Com. Law § 14-3201 et seq.Confidence: lowMichigan Home Solicitation Sales Act — telephone solicitationUS-MISub-national — United StatesMCL 445.111a (Home Solicitation Sales Act)Confidence: low

Other rights in the same countries

Alberta — unclaimed property (Unclaimed Personal Property and Vested Property Act)CA-ABSub-national — CanadaUnclaimed Personal Property and Vested Property Act, SA 2007, c. U-1.5Confidence: mediumAlberta — residential security deposit (Residential Tenancies Act, SA 2004, c R-17.1)CA-ABSub-national — CanadaResidential Tenancies Act, SA 2004, c R-17.1Confidence: lowBritish Columbia — unclaimed property (Unclaimed Property Act, SBC 1999, c. 48)CA-BCSub-national — CanadaUnclaimed Property Act, SBC 1999, c. 48Confidence: mediumBritish Columbia — residential security deposit (Residential Tenancy Act, SBC 2002, c 78)CA-BCSub-national — CanadaResidential Tenancy Act, SBC 2002, c 78Confidence: lowCanada — Canada Post delivery guarantee and claimsCANational — CanadaCanada Post Corporation Act and the Canada Post Terms and ConditionsConfidence: lowCanada — drip pricing under the Competition ActCANational — CanadaCompetition Act (R.S.C. 1985, c. C-34), ss. 52, 74.01 and 36Confidence: mediumCanada — payment card codes of conduct, provincial consumer protection and OBSICANational — CanadaCode of Conduct for the Payment Card Industry in CanadaConfidence: mediumCanada — provincial class proceedings and the Quebec authorisation regimeCANational — CanadaClass Proceedings Act, 1992, S.O. 1992, c. 6 (Ontario)Confidence: medium

Does this one reach your facts?

The engine runs every regime that could apply at once and reconciles them, rather than making you guess which page to read.

Run your factsBack to the catalogue

Not a law firm. Not legal advice. You send it yourself. This page describes a law; it is not advice about your situation and no outcome is promised.