
5822-00380 — Port Alberni Port Authority
The complainant alleged that the Port Alberni Port Authority (PAPA) improperly withheld information under several sections of the Access to Information Act in response to a request for documents related to the lease or sale of its assets. The investigation focused on withheld company names and financial amounts. PAPA claimed exemptions under paragraphs 18(a), 18(b), 18(c), subsection 19(1), and paragraphs 20(1)(b) and 20(1)(c). The Commissioner found that PAPA failed to demonstrate that the withheld information met the requirements for any of the claimed exemptions. Specifically, PAPA did not show that the financial information had substantial value, that its disclosure would harm its competitive position or interfere with negotiations, or that the information was scientific/technical from government research. The Commissioner also determined that a company name was not personal information and that the third-party commercial information was not objectively confidential nor was a clear link established between disclosure and financial harm. Consequently, the Commissioner ordered PAPA to disclose the redacted information. PAPA agreed to implement the order, and the complaint was found to be well founded.
- 1Whether s.18(a) ATIA (government financial, commercial, scientific or technical information) applied to the withheld amounts related to equipment rental
- 2Whether the withheld financial information had substantial value under s.18(a) ATIA
- 3Whether s.18(b) ATIA (competitive position of government institutions or negotiations by government institutions) applied to the withheld amounts related to equipment rental
- 4Whether disclosure of the information would reasonably be expected to harm PAPA's competitive position or interfere with negotiations under s.18(b) ATIA
- 5Whether s.18(c) ATIA (government scientific or technical information obtained from research) applied to any withheld information
- 6Whether the withheld information was scientific or technical, obtained through government research, and if its disclosure would jeopardize publication rights under s.18(c) ATIA
- 7Whether s.19(1) ATIA (personal information) applied to the name of a company
- 8Whether the company name constituted personal information under s.19(1) ATIA
- 9Whether s.20(1)(b) ATIA (confidential third-party financial, commercial, scientific or technical information) applied to the third party's name and leased premises information
- 10Whether the third-party information was confidential by an objective standard under s.20(1)(b) ATIA
- 11Whether s.20(1)(c) ATIA (financial impact on a third party) applied to portions of a lease agreement and specific amounts
- 12Whether disclosure of the information would reasonably be expected to cause material financial loss or gain to the third party or injure its competitive position under s.20(1)(c) ATIA
- Application of s.18(a): Exemption not justified
- Application of s.18(b): Exemption not justified
- Application of s.18(c): Exemption not justified
- Application of s.19(1): Exemption not justified
- Application of s.20(1)(b): Exemption not justified
- Application of s.20(1)(c): Exemption not justified
- Disclosure of records: Redacted information ordered disclosed
Complaint well founded — disclosure ordered
The Port Alberni Port Authority failed to provide sufficient evidence or representations to demonstrate that the withheld information met the requirements of any of the claimed exemptions under sections 18(a), 18(b), 18(c), 19(1), 20(1)(b), or 20(1)(c) of the Access to Information Act.
The President and Chief Executive Officer of Port Alberni Port Authority is ordered to release all information related to company names and amounts that was previously withheld under subsection 19(1) and paragraphs 18(a), 18(b), 20(1)(b) and 20(1)(c).
- s.18(a) ATIA
- s.18(b) ATIA
- s.18(c) ATIA
- s.19(1) ATIA
- s.20(1)(b) ATIA
- s.20(1)(c) ATIA
- s.30(1)(a) ATIA
- s.35(2)(c) ATIA
- s.35(2)(d) 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