Federal (Canada)Access to Information ActWell-founded

5821-03623 — Public Services and Procurement Canada

Organization: Public Services and Procurement CanadaComplainant: Anonymous applicant
Plain-language brief

The complainant alleged that Public Services and Procurement Canada (PSPC) improperly refused to process an access request for all emails of a named employee. PSPC argued that the request lacked sufficient detail because it did not specify a subject matter or timeframe. The Information Commissioner found that PSPC failed to demonstrate that an experienced institutional employee could not identify the relevant records with reasonable effort, even without a specified subject or timeframe. The Commissioner concluded that PSPC's refusal to process the request was unreasonable and that the institution was deemed to have refused access due to not responding by the legislated due date. Given the estimated 50,000 pages of responsive records, the Commissioner ordered PSPC to provide a complete response by July 9, 2029, and recommended training for employees on information management. PSPC agreed to implement both the order and the recommendation, leading to a well-founded complaint.

Key issues
  1. 1Whether the access request met the requirements of section 6 of the ATIA
  2. 2Whether the request provided enough detail for experienced institutional employees to identify relevant records with a reasonable effort
  3. 3Whether PSPC's refusal to process the request was reasonable
  4. 4Whether PSPC was deemed to have refused access under subsection 10(3) of the ATIA
Outcome breakdownFavours: Applicant / complainant
  • Sufficiency of detail: Request deemed sufficiently detailed
  • Refusal to process: Refusal found unreasonable
  • Deemed refusal: Deemed refusal upheld
  • Disclosure order: Records ordered disclosed by specific date
  • Training recommendation: Training recommended and accepted
  • Complaint outcome: Complaint found well-founded
Outcome

Complaint well founded — disclosure ordered

Reasoning

The institution failed to demonstrate that the access request, for all emails of a named employee, did not provide enough detail for experienced institutional employees to identify relevant records with a reasonable effort, as required by section 6 of the ATIA. Therefore, the refusal to process the request was unreasonable, and the institution was deemed to have refused access.

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

The Commissioner ordered Public Services and Procurement Canada to provide a complete response to the access request as soon as possible, but no later than July 9, 2029, and recommended that the Minister ensure employees receive training and support on information management responsibilities and procedures.

Statutes considered
  • s.4(2.1) ATIA
  • s.6 ATIA
  • s.7 ATIA
  • s.10(3) ATIA
  • s.30(1)(a) 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