Condita Research
← Back to catalogue/Federal (Canada)5819-03837
Federal (Canada)Access to Information ActWell-founded

5819-03837 — Transport Canada

Organization: Transport CanadaComplainant: Anonymous applicant
BookmarkView Governing Law
Plain-language brief

The complainant alleged that Transport Canada improperly withheld information related to a Boeing 737 MAX aircraft system (MCAS) under various exemptions of the Access to Information Act. Transport Canada initially withheld all records under paragraphs 20(1)(a), (b), and (c), and the third party, Boeing, also suggested the application of subsection 13(1). The Commissioner found that Transport Canada and Boeing did not demonstrate that all the withheld information met the requirements for trade secrets under paragraph 20(1)(a), nor for confidential third-party information under paragraph 20(1)(b), particularly for general or publicly available information. Similarly, the Commissioner found that the institution failed to demonstrate a reasonable expectation of harm for all information under paragraph 20(1)(c). The Commissioner also concluded that subsection 13(1) did not apply as the information was not provided in confidence. Furthermore, Transport Canada's exercise of discretion under subsection 20(6) was deemed unreasonable as it did not consider the public interest related to the Lion Air and Ethiopian Airlines crashes. The complaint was found to be well-founded, and Transport Canada was ordered to disclose specific information and re-exercise discretion.

Key issues
  1. 1Whether s.19(1) personal information exemption was properly applied (removed from scope)
  2. 2Whether s.20(1)(a) trade secrets exemption was properly applied to all records
  3. 3Whether the information was secret for s.20(1)(a)
  4. 4Whether the third party intended to treat the information as secret for s.20(1)(a)
  5. 5Whether the information had industrial or commercial application for s.20(1)(a)
  6. 6Whether the third party had an interest worthy of legal protection for s.20(1)(a)
  7. 7Whether s.20(1)(b) confidential third-party financial, commercial, scientific or technical information exemption was properly applied to all records
  8. 8Whether the information was financial, commercial, scientific or technical for s.20(1)(b)
  9. 9Whether the information was confidential for s.20(1)(b)
  10. 10Whether the information was supplied by a third party to a government institution for s.20(1)(b)
  11. 11Whether the third party consistently treated the information as confidential for s.20(1)(b)
  12. 12Whether s.20(1)(c) financial impact on a third party exemption was properly applied to all records
  13. 13Whether disclosure could result in material financial loss or gain to the third party for s.20(1)(c)
  14. 14Whether there was a reasonable expectation of harm for s.20(1)(c)
  15. 15Whether disclosure could injure the competitive position of the third party for s.20(1)(c)
  16. 16Whether Transport Canada reasonably exercised discretion under s.20(5) regarding disclosure with consent
  17. 17Whether Transport Canada reasonably exercised discretion under s.20(6) for public health or public safety reasons
  18. 18Whether s.13(1) confidential information from government bodies exemption was properly applied
  19. 19Whether the information was obtained in confidence from a government body for s.13(1)
Outcome breakdownFavours: Applicant / complainant
  • s.20(1)(a) trade secrets: Exemption not upheld for all information
  • s.20(1)(b) confidential info: Exemption not upheld for all information
  • s.20(1)(c) financial harm: Exemption not upheld for all information
  • s.13(1) federal-provincial info: Exemption not upheld
  • s.20(6) public interest override: Discretion exercised unreasonably
  • Disclosure of records: Specific information ordered disclosed
Outcome

Complaint well founded — disclosure ordered and re-exercise of discretion ordered

Reasoning

The Commissioner found that Transport Canada and Boeing failed to meet the burden of proof for applying the exemptions under sections 13(1), 20(1)(a), 20(1)(b), and 20(1)(c) to all the withheld information. Specifically, not all information was found to be trade secrets, confidential, or likely to cause harm upon disclosure. Furthermore, Transport Canada's exercise of discretion under subsection 20(6) was deemed unreasonable due to its failure to consider all relevant public interest factors, particularly those related to the Boeing 737 MAX crashes.

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

The Minister of Transport was ordered to disclose specific information where exemptions were found not to apply and to re-exercise discretion under subsection 20(6) considering all relevant factors, including the public interest related to the Lion Air and Ethiopian Air crashes.

Statutes considered
  • s.13(1) ATIA
  • s.19(1) ATIA
  • s.20(1)(a) ATIA
  • s.20(1)(b) ATIA
  • s.20(1)(c) ATIA
  • s.20(5) ATIA
  • s.20(6) ATIA
  • s.30(1)(a) ATIA
  • s.35(2)(b) ATIA
  • s.35(2)(c) ATIA
  • s.36.1(1) ATIA
  • s.36.1(4)(b) ATIA
  • s.37(4) ATIA
  • s.43 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