Federal (Canada)Access to Information ActNot well-founded

Department of Justice Canada (Re), 2023 OIC 29

Organization: Department of Justice CanadaComplainant: Anonymous applicant
Plain-language brief

The complainant alleged that the Department of Justice Canada (Justice) failed to conduct a reasonable search for a 2009 workplace report prepared by a consultant. Justice tasked its Ontario Regional Office and the Deputy Minister’s Office, both of which reported no responsive records, citing a five-year retention period for such documents, which had expired seven years prior to the request. The OIC investigated whether Justice was required to contact the consultant directly to fulfill the request. Justice maintained that it was not reasonable to expect them to task the consultant, as the business need for the report was time-limited, copies should no longer be with the contractor, and the matter was no longer active. The OIC concluded that Justice conducted a reasonable search based on its internal efforts and retention policies. The complaint was therefore deemed not well founded.

Key issues
  1. 1Whether the Department of Justice Canada conducted a reasonable search for records
  2. 2Whether the institution was required to contact a consultant directly to conduct a reasonable search
  3. 3Whether the institution's application of its record retention policy was appropriate in determining search scope
Outcome breakdownFavours: Institution
  • Adequacy of search: Search deemed reasonable
  • Complaint outcome: Complaint not well founded
Outcome

Complaint not well founded

Reasoning

The OIC was satisfied that Justice conducted a reasonable search by tasking relevant internal offices and applying its record retention policies. The OIC found it was not reasonable to expect Justice to contact the consultant directly, given the time-limited nature of the contract and the expectation that contractors would not retain copies of records after the contract's conclusion.

AI-generated summary for reference only. Always verify against the official decision ↗
Decision notes
Statutes considered
  • s.30(1)(a) 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