Federal (Canada)Access to Information ActWell-founded

3218-01553 — Health Canada

Organization: Health CanadaComplainant: Anonymous applicant
Plain-language brief

The complainant alleged that Health Canada failed to respond to an access request for information about implantable medical devices within the statutory time limits. Health Canada initially claimed a 90-day time extension under paragraphs 9(1)(a) and 9(1)(c) of the ATIA, but failed to respond by the extended due date, leading to a deemed refusal under subsection 10(3). The institution had consulted nine third parties, one of whom filed a judicial review application under section 44, which Health Canada argued prevented the release of any records. During the OIC's investigation, the third party withdrew its application. Health Canada then indicated that further consultations were needed due to intertwined information and the passage of time. The Information Commissioner found the complaint to be well founded and recommended that Health Canada provide a final response to the complainant by a specified date. The Minister of Health agreed to implement this recommendation.

Key issues
  1. 1Whether Health Canada responded to the access request within the time limits set out in the Access to Information Act
  2. 2Whether Health Canada's time extension under paragraphs 9(1)(a) and 9(1)(c) was valid
  3. 3Whether Health Canada was in deemed refusal under subsection 10(3) of the ATIA
  4. 4Whether a third-party judicial review application under section 44 justified the delay in processing the entire request
Outcome breakdownFavours: Applicant / complainant
  • Timeliness / deemed refusal: Deemed refusal upheld
  • Third-party consultations: Judicial review withdrawn
  • Further consultations: Further consultations not justified
  • Final response: Final response ordered by specific date
Outcome

Complaint well founded — disclosure ordered

Reasoning

Health Canada failed to respond to the access request within the extended time limit, resulting in a deemed refusal. While a third-party judicial review application was a factor, it did not ultimately justify the overall delay in providing a final response, especially after the application was withdrawn.

AI-generated summary for reference only. Always verify against the official decision ↗
Decision notes
Recommended action / remedy

The Information Commissioner recommended that Health Canada provide a final response to the complainant by May 26, 2021, and email a copy of the interim and final response letters to the Office of the Information Commissioner’s Registrar.

Statutes considered
  • s.9(1)(a) ATIA
  • s.9(1)(c) ATIA
  • s.10(3) ATIA
  • s.27 ATIA
  • s.28 ATIA
  • s.35(2)(b) ATIA
  • s.41 ATIA
  • s.43 ATIA
  • s.44 ATIA

This summary is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.

Pro · AI

Decisions with similar reasoning and facts — found by AI across statutes and jurisdictions, not just keywords.

Pro
Coverage — 13 of 14 jurisdictions searchable

Fully searchable: Ontario, British Columbia, Alberta, Saskatchewan, Newfoundland and Labrador, Northwest Territories, New Brunswick, Manitoba.

Partial (recent decisions only): Federal (Canada) (651 of 1,631), Nova Scotia (49 of 472), Quebec (6 of 7,090), Prince Edward Island (2 of 279), Yukon (1 of 75).

Coming soon: Nunavut — being re-processed for AI search.

Find decisions like this one — by meaning, not keywords.

Related by meaning is a Pro feature. Upgrade to surface conceptually similar decisions across the corpus, powered by AI.

Upgrade to Pro