5823-03467 — Old Port of Montréal Corporation Inc.
The complainant alleged that the Old Port of Montréal Corporation Inc. (OPMC) improperly withheld information under paragraphs 18(b), 18(d), 20(1)(c), 20(1)(d), and subsection 19(1) of the Access to Information Act. The request sought information related to two requests for proposals (RFP) by invitation. The OPMC argued that disclosure would harm its competitive position, financial interests, or interfere with negotiations, and that some information was personal. The Commissioner found that the OPMC's claims of harm were speculative and did not meet the requirements for the exemptions. Specifically, the names redacted under subsection 19(1) were found to be subject to the exception at paragraph 3(j) of the Privacy Act, as they pertained to employees receiving documents as part of their duties. The Commissioner ordered the OPMC to disclose the records in their entirety, and the OPMC agreed to implement the order. The complaint was found to be well founded.
- 1Whether s.18(b) ATIA (competitive position of government institutions or negotiations by government institutions) was properly applied
- 2Whether s.18(d) ATIA (government financial interests or Government of Canada’s ability to manage the economy) was properly applied
- 3Whether s.19(1) ATIA (personal information) was properly applied
- 4Whether the names of employees receiving documents as part of their duties fall under the exception at paragraph 3(j) of the Privacy Act
- 5Whether s.20(1)(c) ATIA (financial impact on a third party) was properly applied
- 6Whether s.20(1)(d) ATIA (negotiations by a third party) was properly applied
- 7Whether the alleged harms were speculative in nature
- s.18(b) exemption: Exemption not upheld
- s.18(d) exemption: Exemption not upheld
- s.20(1)(c) exemption: Exemption not upheld
- s.20(1)(d) exemption: Exemption not upheld
- s.19(1) personal information: Exemption not upheld
- Disclosure of records: Records ordered disclosed
- Complaint outcome: Complaint well founded
Complaint well founded — disclosure ordered
The OPMC failed to demonstrate a reasonable expectation of probable harm for the exemptions claimed under sections 18(b), 18(d), 20(1)(c), and 20(1)(d). The alleged harms were speculative. For section 19(1), the redacted names of employees were found to be business contact information falling under the exception at paragraph 3(j) of the Privacy Act.
The Information Commissioner ordered the Old Port of Montréal Corporation Inc. to disclose the records in their entirety.
- s.18(b) ATIA
- s.18(d) ATIA
- s.19(1) ATIA
- s.20(1)(c) ATIA
- s.20(1)(d) 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
- s.3(j) Privacy Act
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