5822-02864 — National Research Council Canada
The complainant alleged that the National Research Council Canada (NRC) improperly withheld information under sections 20(1)(d), 21(1)(a), 21(1)(c), and 23 of the Access to Information Act. The request concerned records related to negotiations with the Professional Institute of the Public Service of Canada (PIPSC) regarding overtime conversion. The OIC found that the NRC failed to demonstrate that the requirements for exemptions under paragraphs 20(1)(d), 21(1)(a), and 21(1)(c) were met for all the withheld information. Specifically, the OIC determined that the NRC could not establish a reasonable expectation of interference with negotiations for the information withheld under 20(1)(d), and that the NRC did not reasonably exercise its discretion for some information under 21(1)(a). However, the OIC upheld the application of section 23 for solicitor-client privilege. The Commissioner ordered the NRC to disclose certain information originally withheld under paragraphs 20(1)(d), 21(1)(a), and 21(1)(c). The NRC agreed to implement the order, and the complaint was found to be well founded.
- 1Whether s.20(1)(d) contractual or other negotiations exemption was properly applied
- 2Whether disclosure of information could reasonably be expected to interfere with third-party negotiations under s.20(1)(d)
- 3Whether the institution met the requirements for s.20(1)(d)
- 4Whether s.21(1)(a) advice or recommendations exemption was properly applied
- 5Whether the information constituted advice or recommendations developed by or for a government institution or minister under s.21(1)(a)
- 6Whether the institution reasonably exercised its discretion to disclose information under s.21(1)(a)
- 7Whether s.21(1)(c) positions or plans developed for negotiations exemption was properly applied
- 8Whether the information consisted of positions or plans developed for negotiations by or on behalf of the Government of Canada under s.21(1)(c)
- 9Whether s.23 solicitor-client privilege exemption was properly applied
- 10Whether the information constituted confidential legal advice under s.23
- 11Whether the institution reasonably exercised its discretion to disclose information under s.23
- s.20(1)(d) third-party info: Exemption not upheld for some information
- s.21(1)(a) federal-provincial affairs: Exemption not upheld for some information
- s.21(1)(c) federal-provincial affairs: Exemption not upheld for some information
- s.23 solicitor-client privilege: Exemption upheld
- Disclosure of records: Partial disclosure ordered
- Complaint outcome: Complaint well founded
Complaint well founded — disclosure ordered
The National Research Council Canada failed to demonstrate that the requirements for exemptions under paragraphs 20(1)(d), 21(1)(a), and 21(1)(c) were met for all the withheld information, or that it reasonably exercised its discretion for some of the information. However, the institution successfully demonstrated that section 23 (solicitor-client privilege) was properly applied to other portions of the records.
The President of the National Research Council Canada is ordered to disclose specific information originally withheld under paragraphs 20(1)(d), 21(1)(a), and 21(1)(c).
- s.20(1)(d) ATIA
- s.21(1)(a) ATIA
- s.21(1)(c) ATIA
- s.23 ATIA
- s.25 ATIA
- s.30(1)(a) ATIA
- s.35 ATIA
- s.36.3(1) 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