Federal (Canada)Access to Information ActWell-founded

5822-01936 — Correctional Service Canada

Organization: Correctional Service CanadaComplainant: Anonymous applicant
Plain-language brief

The complainant alleged that Correctional Service Canada (CSC) improperly withheld information under subsection 19(1) (personal information) of the Access to Information Act. The request sought emails to and from the Warden at Millhaven Institution related to COVID-19 and Structured Intervention Units. The investigation confirmed that some withheld information, such as names and contact details of staff and offenders for contact tracing, performance appraisals, and criminal history, met the requirements of subsection 19(1). However, the Commissioner found that other information, including dates of last and next shifts for CX and healthcare staff, names of individuals in an email discussing performance ratings, all information on page 77, and the type of incidents in situation reports, did not meet the criteria for personal information under subsection 19(1). CSC's exercise of discretion under subsection 19(2) was deemed reasonable as the circumstances for disclosure were not met. The Commissioner ordered CSC to disclose the information that did not meet the requirements of subsection 19(1), and CSC agreed to implement the order. The complaint was found to be well founded.

Key issues
  1. 1Whether names and contact information of staff and offenders for COVID-19 contact tracing constitute personal information under s.19(1) ATIA
  2. 2Whether performance appraisals constitute personal information under s.19(1) ATIA
  3. 3Whether information related to intra-regional transfers constitutes personal information under s.19(1) ATIA
  4. 4Whether names, birthdates, and FPS numbers of offenders constitute personal information under s.19(1) ATIA
  5. 5Whether details regarding an offender’s criminal history constitute personal information under s.19(1) ATIA
  6. 6Whether dates of last shift and next shift for CX and healthcare staff constitute personal information under s.19(1) ATIA
  7. 7Whether dates of last shift and next shift for MAI and unit CM staff constitute personal information under s.19(1) ATIA
  8. 8Whether names of individuals in an email discussing proposed rating changes constitute personal information under s.19(1) ATIA
  9. 9Whether information on page 77 constitutes personal information under s.19(1) ATIA
  10. 10Whether the type of incident in situation reports constitutes personal information under s.19(1) ATIA
  11. 11Whether CSC reasonably exercised its discretion under s.19(2) ATIA to disclose information
Outcome breakdownFavours: Both, in part
  • s.19(1) personal information: Exemption partially upheld
  • s.19(2) discretion to disclose: Discretion exercise upheld
  • Disclosure of records: Partial disclosure ordered
  • Complaint outcome: Complaint well founded
Outcome

Complaint well founded — disclosure ordered

Reasoning

The Commissioner found that while some information was properly withheld under s.19(1), other portions did not meet the definition of personal information and therefore should be disclosed. CSC's exercise of discretion under s.19(2) was reasonable because the conditions for disclosure (consent, public availability, or public interest outweighing privacy) were not met for the information that was indeed personal.

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

The Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness is ordered to disclose the date of last shift and date of next shift for individuals in the healthcare and CX categories on pages 9, 30-31; the date of isolation on page 49; the names of 3 individuals on page 58; all information withheld under 19(1) on page 77; and the type of incidents contained in the situation reports on pages 83-110, 128-156, 165-182, 184-204.

Statutes considered
  • s.19(1) ATIA
  • s.19(2) ATIA
  • s.30(1)(a) ATIA
  • s.36.2 ATIA
  • s.37(2) ATIA
  • s.43 ATIA
  • s.3(j) Privacy Act
  • s.8 Privacy Act
  • s.8(2) Privacy Act

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