Federal (Canada)Access to Information Acts.6.1 Application Granted (refusal authorized)

Decision pursuant to 6.1, 2022 OIC 35

Organization: A federal institutionComplainant: Anonymous applicant
Plain-language brief

A federal institution applied to the Information Commissioner under subsection 6.1(1) of the Access to Information Act to decline to act on an access request, arguing it was vexatious and an abuse of the right of access. The request sought records related to disclosures under the Public Servants Disclosure and Protection Act, submitted by or provided to the requester. The institution contended that the request was part of a pattern of repetitive and duplicative requests for substantively the same information, much of which the requester already possessed or had provided to the institution. The Commissioner found that the institution successfully demonstrated that the request constituted an abuse of the right of access, noting the repeated requests for identical information and the requester's refusal to narrow the scope. The Commissioner also determined that the institution had fulfilled its duty to assist obligations by attempting to clarify and refine the request. Consequently, the Commissioner granted the institution's application to decline to act on the request.

Key issues
  1. 1Whether the access request is an abuse of the right of access under s.6.1(1) ATIA
  2. 2Whether the institution fulfilled its duty to assist obligations under s.4(2.1) ATIA
  3. 3Whether the request is vexatious under s.6.1(1) ATIA
Outcome breakdownFavours: Institution
  • Vexatious request: Application to decline upheld
  • Abuse of right of access: Application to decline upheld
  • Duty to assist: Institution fulfilled obligations
Outcome

Section 6.1 application granted

Reasoning

The Commissioner found clear and compelling evidence that the request was an abuse of the right of access, being part of a pattern of repetitive requests for information already largely in the requester's possession or previously provided. The institution also met its duty to assist by attempting to clarify the request.

AI-generated summary for reference only. Always verify against the official decision ↗
Decision notes
Statutes considered
  • s.6.1(1) ATIA
  • s.4(2.1) 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