5821-02741 — Employment and Social Development Canada
The complainant alleged that Employment and Social Development Canada (ESDC) improperly withheld information under subsection 19(1) (personal information) and paragraph 20(1)(b) (confidential third-party information) of the Access to Information Act. The request was for fatality investigation reports from rail industry employers. The Information Commissioner found that while much of the withheld information was personal information under s.19(1), some was not about identifiable individuals and should be disclosed. Regarding third-party information, the Commissioner determined that neither ESDC nor the third parties provided sufficient justification for withholding all information under paragraphs 20(1)(b) or 20(1)(c). The Commissioner ordered ESDC to disclose information not about identifiable individuals, re-exercise discretion regarding publicly available personal information, disclose information not meeting the requirements of paragraph 20(1)(b), and re-exercise discretion under subsection 20(5) for information related to a third party that consented to disclosure. ESDC agreed to implement the order. The complaint was found to be well founded.
- 1Whether information withheld under s.19(1) was truly about identifiable individuals
- 2Whether ESDC adequately considered if personal information was publicly available under s.19(2)(b)
- 3Whether ESDC adequately considered public interest in disclosure under s.19(2)(c) in relation to s.8 of the Privacy Act
- 4Whether information met the definition of financial, commercial, scientific or technical information under s.20(1)(b)
- 5Whether information was confidential by an objective standard under s.20(1)(b)
- 6Whether information was consistently treated as confidential by third parties under s.20(1)(b)
- 7Whether ESDC reasonably exercised discretion under s.20(5) when a third party consented to disclosure
- 8Whether ESDC reasonably exercised discretion under s.20(6) for public health or safety reasons
- 9Whether disclosure could reasonably be expected to have a material financial impact or injure competitive position under s.20(1)(c)
- 10Whether ESDC properly applied severance under s.25
- s.19(1) personal information: Some information not personal, ordered disclosed
- s.19(1) publicly available: Discretion re-exercised for publicly available personal information
- s.20(1)(b) confidential third-party: Insufficient justification for withholding, ordered disclosed
- s.20(1)(c) financial information: Insufficient justification for withholding, ordered disclosed
- s.20(5) third-party consent: Discretion re-exercised for consented information
- Complaint outcome: Complaint well founded
Complaint well founded — disclosure ordered
The Commissioner found that ESDC improperly withheld information that was not personal in nature or not about identifiable individuals, and failed to adequately consider public availability and exercise discretion under s.19(2)(b). For third-party information, ESDC and third parties did not sufficiently demonstrate that all withheld information met the requirements of s.20(1)(b) or s.20(1)(c), and ESDC failed to exercise discretion under s.20(5) when a third party consented to disclosure. ESDC also failed to apply severance properly.
The Commissioner ordered Employment and Social Development Canada to disclose information not about identifiable individuals, determine to what extent personal information is publicly available and re-exercise discretion under paragraph 19(2)(b), disclose information not meeting the requirements of paragraph 20(1)(b), and re-exercise discretion under subsection 20(5) for information related to a third party that consented to disclosure.
- s.19(1) ATIA
- s.20(1)(b) ATIA
- s.30(1)(a) ATIA
- s.35(2)(c) ATIA
- s.36.3 ATIA
- s.19(2)(a) ATIA
- s.19(2)(b) ATIA
- s.19(2)(c) ATIA
- s.8 Privacy Act
- s.8(2)(m)(i) Privacy Act
- s.20(5) ATIA
- s.20(6) ATIA
- s.20(1)(c) ATIA
- s.25 ATIA
- s.36.1(1) ATIA
- s.43 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