Federal (Canada)Access to Information ActWell-founded

5822-06512 — Public Safety Canada

Organization: Public Safety CanadaComplainant: Anonymous applicant
Plain-language brief

The complainant alleged that Public Safety Canada improperly withheld information under subsection 19(1) and paragraph 20(1)(b.1) of the Access to Information Act, concerning user agreements for the national public alerting system. During the investigation, the complainant narrowed the scope, no longer requiring investigation into subsection 19(1) or information on pages 1-12. The OIC found that neither Public Safety nor the third party, Pelmorex Communications, could demonstrate that the agreements were "supplied" by the third party, a key requirement for exemptions 20(1)(b.1) and 20(1)(b). Public Safety also invoked subsection 16(2) for a DocuSign ID, but the Commissioner found no reasonable expectation of harm. Consequently, the Commissioner ordered Public Safety to disclose the records in their entirety, excluding information previously withheld under subsection 19(1). Public Safety agreed to implement the order, and the complaint was found to be well founded.

Key issues
  1. 1Whether information in negotiated agreements was "supplied" by a third party for the purpose of s.20(1)(b.1) ATIA
  2. 2Whether information in negotiated agreements was "supplied" by a third party for the purpose of s.20(1)(b) ATIA
  3. 3Whether disclosure of a DocuSign envelope identification number could reasonably be expected to facilitate the commission of an offence under s.16(2) ATIA
Outcome breakdownFavours: Applicant / complainant
  • s.20(1)(b.1) third-party info: Exemption not upheld
  • s.20(1)(b) third-party info: Exemption not upheld
  • s.16(2) law enforcement: Exemption not upheld
  • Disclosure of records: Records ordered disclosed
  • Complaint outcome: Complaint well founded
Outcome

Complaint well founded — disclosure ordered

Reasoning

The institution and third party failed to demonstrate that the information in the user agreements was "supplied" by the third party, a necessary condition for applying paragraphs 20(1)(b.1) and 20(1)(b). Additionally, the institution did not provide sufficient evidence to establish a reasonable expectation of harm under subsection 16(2) from disclosing a DocuSign ID.

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 records at issue in their entirety (pages 13-41), other than the information withheld under subsection 19(1).

Statutes considered
  • s.16(2) ATIA
  • s.19(1) ATIA
  • s.20(1)(b) ATIA
  • s.20(1)(b.1) 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.

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