Federal (Canada)Access to Information ActNot well-founded

5822-07913 — Health Canada

Organization: Health CanadaComplainant: Anonymous applicant
Plain-language brief

The complainant alleged that Health Canada's 1,000-day extension of time to respond to an access request was unreasonable. The request sought information regarding an application for religious exemption to serve ayahuasca. Health Canada claimed the extension under paragraphs 9(1)(a) and 9(1)(b) of the Access to Information Act, citing a large volume of records (over 14,000 pages) and the need for extensive consultations, particularly with its Legal Services Unit, due to the sensitive and precedent-setting nature of the subject matter. The institution argued that processing the request within a shorter timeframe would unreasonably interfere with its operations and that consultations could not be completed within 30 days. The Information Commissioner found that Health Canada met all the requirements for both paragraphs 9(1)(a) and 9(1)(b), concluding that the calculation of the extension was logical and supportable, and that the extension was reasonable. Consequently, the complaint was deemed not well founded, and the due date for the response remains December 19, 2025.

Key issues
  1. 1Whether the access request was for a large number of records under s.9(1)(a)
  2. 2Whether meeting the 30-day deadline would unreasonably interfere with the institution’s operations under s.9(1)(a)
  3. 3Whether the extension of time was for a reasonable period under s.9(1)(a)
  4. 4Whether consultations were necessary under s.9(1)(b)
  5. 5Whether consultations could reasonably be completed within 30 days under s.9(1)(b)
  6. 6Whether the extension of time was for a reasonable period under s.9(1)(b)
Outcome breakdownFavours: Institution
  • Extension of time (volume): Extension upheld under s.9(1)(a)
  • Extension of time (consultations): Extension upheld under s.9(1)(b)
  • Reasonableness of extension: Extension found reasonable
  • Complaint about extension: Complaint dismissed
Outcome

Complaint not well founded

Reasoning

Health Canada demonstrated that the request involved a large volume of complex and sensitive records, requiring extensive internal consultations that could not be completed within the statutory 30-day period without unreasonably interfering with its operations. The institution provided a logical and supportable basis for the 1,000-day extension, satisfying the requirements of paragraphs 9(1)(a) and 9(1)(b) of the Act.

AI-generated summary for reference only. Always verify against the official decision ↗
Decision notes
Statutes considered
  • s.7 ATIA
  • s.9(1) ATIA
  • s.9(1)(a) ATIA
  • s.9(1)(b) ATIA
  • s.30(1)(c) 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