5821-07279 — Vancouver Fraser Port Authority and Musqueam Indian Band
An applicant complained that the Vancouver Fraser Port Authority (VFPA) improperly withheld an agreement with the Musqueam Indian Band under sections 18(b) and 20(1)(b) of the Access to Information Act. The Commissioner found that while some parts of the agreement could reasonably be expected to interfere with the VFPA's negotiations under s.18(b), other parts were publicly known or deducible and did not meet the exemption criteria. Furthermore, the VFPA failed to reasonably exercise its discretion by not considering factors in favour of disclosure. Regarding s.20(1)(b), the Commissioner determined that the agreement, in its entirety, did not meet the criteria for confidential financial, commercial, scientific, or technical information, particularly because it consisted of negotiated terms rather than information supplied by a third party. The Commissioner ordered the VFPA to disclose information not meeting s.20(1)(b) criteria and to re-exercise discretion for information meeting s.18(b). The VFPA agreed to release some information but did not address the re-exercise of discretion.
- 1Whether s.18(b) competitive position harm was reasonably expected
- 2Whether s.18(b) interference with negotiations was reasonably expected
- 3Whether the VFPA reasonably exercised its discretion under s.18(b)
- 4Whether the information was financial, commercial, scientific, or technical under s.20(1)(b)
- 5Whether the information was confidential under s.20(1)(b)
- 6Whether the information was supplied by a third party under s.20(1)(b)
- 7Whether the third party consistently treated the information as confidential under s.20(1)(b)
- s.18(b) financial interests: Exemption partially upheld
- s.18(b) discretion: Discretion improperly exercised
- s.20(1)(b) third-party info: Exemption not met
- Disclosure order: Partial disclosure ordered
- Compliance with order: Partial compliance
Complaint well founded — disclosure ordered and discretion re-exercised
The Commissioner found that the VFPA did not fully justify the application of s.18(b) to all withheld information and failed to reasonably exercise its discretion. Additionally, the VFPA and the third party did not demonstrate that the information met all the criteria for exemption under s.20(1)(b), particularly that it was 'supplied' by the third party.
The Commissioner ordered the Vancouver Fraser Port Authority to disclose all information withheld under s.20(1)(b) unless it meets s.18(b) criteria, and to re-exercise discretion concerning information found to meet s.18(b) criteria, considering factors in favour of disclosure.
- s.18(b) ATIA
- s.20(1)(b) ATIA
- s.30(1)(a) ATIA
- s.35(2)(c) ATIA
- s.36.3 ATIA
- s.37(2) 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