Condita Research
← Back to catalogue/Federal (Canada)5820-03625
Federal (Canada)Access to Information ActWell-founded

Fisheries and Oceans Canada (Re), 2023 OIC 42

Organization: Fisheries and Oceans CanadaComplainant: Anonymous applicant
BookmarkView Governing Law
Plain-language brief

The complainant alleged that Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO) improperly withheld information related to the Laval River slope stabilization project under several sections of the Access to Information Act. Specifically, DFO claimed exemptions under paragraphs 13(1)(c) (confidential information from government bodies), 16(2) (security), 16(2)(c) (facilitating an offence), 19(1) (personal information), and 20(1)(c) (financial impact on a third party). During the investigation, the complainant narrowed the scope, removing the application of subsections 16(2) and 19(1) to signatures where the signing authority's name was present. The Information Commissioner found that DFO failed to demonstrate that the information withheld under paragraph 13(1)(c) was obtained in confidence, and neither DFO nor the third party justified the application of paragraph 20(1)(c). However, the Commissioner upheld the application of subsection 19(1) for personal information. Consequently, the Commissioner ordered DFO to release all information previously withheld under paragraphs 13(1)(c) and 20(1)(c), with the exception of the personal information properly withheld under subsection 19(1). DFO notified the Commissioner that it would implement the order.

Key issues
  1. 1Whether s.13(1)(c) ATIA (confidential information from government bodies) was properly applied
  2. 2Whether the information was obtained in confidence for s.13(1)(c) ATIA
  3. 3Whether s.19(1) ATIA (personal information) was properly applied
  4. 4Whether the information is about an individual for s.19(1) ATIA
  5. 5Whether there is a serious possibility of identification for s.19(1) ATIA
  6. 6Whether the information falls under exceptions to the definition of personal information for s.19(1) ATIA
  7. 7Whether DFO reasonably exercised discretion under s.19(2) ATIA
  8. 8Whether s.20(1)(c) ATIA (financial impact on a third party) was properly applied
  9. 9Whether disclosure could result in material financial loss or gain to the third party for s.20(1)(c) ATIA
  10. 10Whether there is a reasonable expectation of harm for s.20(1)(c) ATIA
  11. 11Whether disclosure could injure the competitive position of the third party for s.20(1)(c) ATIA
Outcome breakdownFavours: Both, in part
  • s.13(1)(c) confidential information: Exemption not justified, disclosure ordered
  • s.16(2) security: Application withdrawn by complainant
  • s.19(1) personal information: Exemption upheld
  • s.20(1)(c) financial impact: Exemption not justified, disclosure ordered
  • Implementation of order: Institution agreed to implement order
Outcome

Complaint well founded — disclosure ordered for some records

Reasoning

DFO failed to establish that the information withheld under paragraph 13(1)(c) was provided with an expectation of confidentiality, and neither DFO nor the third party demonstrated that the criteria for paragraph 20(1)(c) were met. However, the personal information withheld under subsection 19(1) was found to meet the exemption's requirements.

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

The Minister of Fisheries and Oceans is ordered to release all information previously withheld pursuant to paragraphs 13(1)(c) and 20(1)(c), with the exception of the information withheld under subsection 19(1).

Statutes considered
  • s.13(1)(c) ATIA
  • s.16(2) ATIA
  • s.16(2)(c) ATIA
  • s.19(1) ATIA
  • s.20(1)(c) ATIA
  • s.30(1)(a) ATIA
  • s.35(2)(c) ATIA
  • s.36.3(1) ATIA
  • s.13(2) ATIA
  • s.19(2) ATIA
  • s.19(2)(a) ATIA
  • s.19(2)(b) ATIA
  • s.19(2)(c) ATIA
  • s.20(5) 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