Federal (Canada)Access to Information ActDiscontinued

Notice under subsection 30(5), 2023 OIC 40

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

The Information Commissioner ceased investigation into seventeen complaints, finding them vexatious. The complaints alleged unreasonable time extensions taken by an institution. However, the Commissioner found that these seventeen requests sought the same information as a previous request from the same complainant, which had already been the subject of an OIC investigation where the time extension was deemed reasonable. The complainant had not pursued a Federal Court review of the previous finding. Evidence showed the institution was providing regular interim responses as committed, contrary to the complainant's assertion. The Commissioner concluded that the new complaints were an attempt to circumvent the OIC's previous findings and avoid the proper recourse mechanism of Federal Court review. Therefore, the Commissioner ceased investigation under paragraphs 30(4)(a) and (b) of the Access to Information Act.

Key issues
  1. 1Whether the complaints were vexatious under s.30(4)(a) ATIA
  2. 2Whether further investigation was unnecessary under s.30(4)(b) ATIA
  3. 3Whether the new requests were substantively duplicative of a previously investigated complaint
  4. 4Whether the complainant was attempting to circumvent previous OIC findings
Outcome breakdownFavours: Institution
  • Vexatious complaints: Complaints ceased as vexatious
  • Time extension: Previous finding of reasonable extension upheld
  • Circumvention of process: Attempt to circumvent previous findings noted
  • Recourse mechanism: Failure to pursue Federal Court review noted
Outcome

Investigation ceased — complaints found vexatious and unnecessary to investigate further

Reasoning

The Commissioner found the complaints vexatious and unnecessary to investigate further because they were substantively duplicative of a previous complaint that had already been investigated, and the complainant was attempting to circumvent the OIC's previous findings rather than pursuing the proper recourse of Federal Court review.

AI-generated summary for reference only. Always verify against the official decision ↗
Decision notes
Statutes considered
  • s.30(4)(a) ATIA
  • s.30(4)(b) ATIA
  • s.30(5) ATIA
  • s.41(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