Federal (Canada)Access to Information Acts.6.1 Application Granted (refusal authorized)

Decision pursuant to 6.1, 2024 OIC 77

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

An unnamed federal institution sought the Information Commissioner's approval to decline to act on an access request under subsection 6.1(1) of the Access to Information Act. The request, received in November 2020, was exceptionally broad, seeking all tenders, solicitations, and related communications specifying OEM brand names from 2011 to 2020, with an estimated 8 million pages of records. The institution argued that processing such a volume would constitute an abuse of the right of access, overburden its operational units and ATIP office, and severely impact other requesters' rights. Despite the institution's efforts to assist the requester in narrowing the scope, the requester refused, citing a desire to protect their identity and ensure comprehensive coverage. The Commissioner found that the institution plausibly established the request as an abuse of the right of access due to the immense burden it would impose, estimating 30 to 230 years for processing. The Commissioner also concluded that the institution had met its duty to assist the requester. Consequently, the Commissioner granted the institution's application to decline to act on the request, emphasizing that while the application was delayed, the abuse of the right of access was too significant to deny it on timeliness grounds.

Key issues
  1. 1Whether the access request constitutes an abuse of the right to make a request under subsection 6.1(1) of the Access to Information Act
  2. 2Whether the volume and complexity of the requested records would overburden the institution's Offices of Primary Interest (OPIs)
  3. 3Whether the volume and complexity of the requested records would overburden the institution's Access to Information and Privacy (ATIP) office
  4. 4Whether processing the access request would negatively impact the right of access of other requesters
  5. 5Whether the institution made every reasonable effort to assist the requester in connection with their request, as required by subsection 4(2.1) of the Access to Information Act
  6. 6Whether the requester's stated reasons for the broad scope of the request (to protect identity and ensure comprehensive coverage) were justified
  7. 7Whether the delay in the institution's submission of the application to decline to act should lead to its refusal
Outcome breakdownFavours: Institution
  • Abuse of right of access: Abuse of right of access established
  • Duty to assist: Duty to assist met by institution
  • Decline to act: Application to decline to act granted
  • Timeliness of application: Delay in application did not negate abuse finding
Outcome

Section 6.1 application granted

Reasoning

The Commissioner found that the institution established the access request as an abuse of the right to make a request due to its immense volume and complexity, which would overburden the institution's resources and negatively impact other requesters' rights. The institution also met its duty to assist the requester, and the significant abuse of right outweighed the delay in filing the application.

AI-generated summary for reference only. Always verify against the official decision ↗
Decision notes
Statutes considered
  • s.6.1(1) ATIA
  • s.6.1(1.1) ATIA
  • s.4(2.1) 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