5821-01072 — Department of Justice Canada
The complainant alleged that the Department of Justice Canada (Justice) took an unreasonable 2,280-day extension to respond to an access to information request. Justice claimed the extension under paragraphs 9(1)(a) and 9(1)(b) of the Access to Information Act, citing a large volume of records and the need for consultations. The Information Commissioner found that while the request involved a large volume of records and responding within 30 days would interfere with operations, Justice failed to sufficiently justify the reasonableness of the 2,190-day extension claimed under 9(1)(a). Specifically, Justice did not explain how the duration of various processing steps was determined or why certain steps could not be conducted concurrently. However, the Commissioner found the 90-day extension for consultations under 9(1)(b) to be reasonable. Due to the unreasonable extension under 9(1)(a), Justice was deemed to have refused access. The complaint was found to be well-founded, and Justice was ordered to provide a final response forthwith.
- 1Whether the request was for a large volume of records or required searching through a large number of records under s.9(1)(a)
- 2Whether responding within 30 days would unreasonably interfere with the institution's operations under s.9(1)(a)
- 3Whether the length of the time extension claimed under s.9(1)(a) was reasonable
- 4Whether consultations with other institutions or bodies were necessary under s.9(1)(b)
- 5Whether the length of the time extension claimed under s.9(1)(b) was reasonable
- 6Whether the institution was in deemed refusal under s.10(3)
- Timeliness / deemed refusal: Unreasonable extension under 9(1)(a) led to deemed refusal
- Extension (9(1)(a)): Extension under 9(1)(a) found unreasonable
- Extension (9(1)(b)): Extension under 9(1)(b) found reasonable
- Complaint outcome: Complaint well-founded
- Remedy: Final response ordered forthwith
Complaint well founded — disclosure ordered
The institution failed to demonstrate that the 2,190-day extension claimed under paragraph 9(1)(a) was reasonable, as it did not provide sufficient justification for the duration of the various processing steps or explain why certain steps could not be conducted concurrently. This rendered the overall extension invalid, leading to a deemed refusal.
The Minister of Justice is ordered to provide a final response forthwith and email a copy of the response letters to the Office of the Information Commissioner’s Registrar.
- s.7 ATIA
- s.9(1)(a) ATIA
- s.9(1)(b) ATIA
- s.10(3) ATIA
- s.36.1(1) ATIA
This summary is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.
Related by meaning
Decisions with similar reasoning and facts — found by AI across statutes and jurisdictions, not just keywords.
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