Federal (Canada)Access to Information ActNot well-founded

5825-01584 — National Defence

Organization: National DefenceComplainant: Anonymous applicant
Plain-language brief

The complainant alleged that National Defence (DND) improperly refused to issue a new response letter after providing contextual information in its initial response to an access request. The request sought policy records, regulations, directives, orders, and instructions concerning the authority to generate Branch Standing Orders within the Canadian Armed Forces. DND's initial response stated that no responsive records were found but included additional information, such as hyperlinks to publicly available documents and an explanation using cautious language like "might," to assist the requester. The complainant argued this contextual information was speculative and not based on documented records, thus contravening DND's duty to assist under subsection 4(2.1) of the Access to Information Act. The OIC found that DND's inclusion of supplementary information, clearly distinguished from the official response, was an attempt to assist the requester in good faith and did not misrepresent the existence of records or create new ones. Therefore, DND was not obligated to issue a new response letter.

Key issues
  1. 1Whether National Defence improperly refused to issue a new response letter
  2. 2Whether the inclusion of contextual information in a 'no records' response contravenes the duty to assist under subsection 4(2.1) ATIA
  3. 3Whether the contextual information was speculative and not grounded in documented records
  4. 4Whether the institution's response was complete and appropriate under subsection 10(1) ATIA
Outcome breakdownFavours: Institution
  • Duty to assist: Institution's actions upheld
  • New response letter: Not required
Outcome

Complaint not well founded

Reasoning

The OIC found that DND's inclusion of supplementary information, clearly distinguished from the official response, was a good faith attempt to assist the requester, consistent with subsection 4(2.1) of the Act. It did not misrepresent the existence of records or create new ones, and the official response regarding the absence of records was complete and appropriate.

AI-generated summary for reference only. Always verify against the official decision ↗
Decision notes
Statutes considered
  • s.4(2.1) ATIA
  • s.10(1) ATIA
  • s.30(1)(f) ATIA

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