
Decision pursuant to 6.1, 2025 OIC 47
An institution applied to the Information Commissioner seeking approval to decline an access request, claiming it was vexatious. The institution argued the request was made in retaliation for how a previous request was handled, citing the requester's deadline threat, refusal to narrow the scope, and threats to complain to other commissioners. The Commissioner found the institution did not prove the request was vexatious, noting the requester's explanations for their actions were more plausible. Therefore, the application to decline the request was denied.
- Whether the access request was vexatious, made in bad faith, or an abuse of the right of access.
- Interpretation of the phrase 'further action will be taken' in the context of an access request.
- Whether a requester's refusal to narrow the scope of a request indicates a vexatious purpose.
- Whether the timing and content of the request indicated vexatious intent.
Section 6.1 application denied
The Commissioner found that the institution failed to meet its burden of proof to demonstrate that the access request was vexatious. The Commissioner found the requester's explanations for their actions and the request's timing and content to be more plausible than the institution's interpretations.
AI-generated summary for reference only. Always verify against the official decision ↗
The institution is required to act on the access request.
- s.6.1 ATIA
This decision is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.

