BreachOfPrivacy
Decisions/Federal (Canada)

Federal (Canada) Privacy Decisions

Browse privacy decisions from Federal (Canada) — with AI-generated plain-language summaries for every ruling.

2 decisions matching
Federal (Canada)Access to Information ActNot well-founded
Jun 28, 20232023 OIC 24· Indexed Apr 21, 2026

Library and Archives Canada (Re), 2023 OIC 24

Library and Archives Canada

The complainant alleged that Library and Archives Canada (LAC) took an unreasonable amount of time to grant a time extension for an access to information request. The request was for records related to access requests concerning 'Project Anecdote'. LAC claimed a 1,095-day extension under paragraphs 9(1)(a) and (b) of the Act, pushing the response deadline to June 20, 2025. The Information Commissioner found that LAC met all the requirements for this extension, deeming it valid.

Quick View

Access to Information ActNot well-founded

Library and Archives Canada (Re), 2023 OIC 24

Jun 28, 20232023 OIC 24
Adjudicator: Caroline Maynard
Plain-Language Summary

The complainant alleged that Library and Archives Canada (LAC) took an unreasonable amount of time to grant a time extension for an access to information request. The request was for records related to access requests concerning 'Project Anecdote'. LAC claimed a 1,095-day extension under paragraphs 9(1)(a) and (b) of the Act, pushing the response deadline to June 20, 2025. The Information Commissioner found that LAC met all the requirements for this extension, deeming it valid.

Key Issues
  • Reasonableness of time extension claimed by institution under subsection 9(1)
  • Whether institution met the requirements of paragraphs 9(1)(a) and (b) for the extension
Federal (Canada)Access to Information ActNot well-founded
Jun 14, 20235821-00288· Indexed Apr 21, 2026

Department of Justice Canada (Re), 2023 OIC 29

Department of Justice Canada

The complainant alleged that the Department of Justice Canada did not conduct a reasonable search for a 2009 workplace report. The Department stated that the record's retention period was five years and it was requested seven years later, meaning it would have been destroyed. While the complainant claimed the consultant still had a copy, the Department argued it was not reasonable to contact the consultant directly given the nature and age of the contract. The OIC agreed that the Department conducted a reasonable search.

Quick View

Access to Information ActNot well-founded

Department of Justice Canada (Re), 2023 OIC 29

Jun 14, 20235821-00288
Adjudicator: Caroline Maynard
Plain-Language Summary

The complainant alleged that the Department of Justice Canada did not conduct a reasonable search for a 2009 workplace report. The Department stated that the record's retention period was five years and it was requested seven years later, meaning it would have been destroyed. While the complainant claimed the consultant still had a copy, the Department argued it was not reasonable to contact the consultant directly given the nature and age of the contract. The OIC agreed that the Department conducted a reasonable search.

Key Issues
  • Did the institution conduct a reasonable search for the requested records?
  • Whether the institution was required to contact the consultant directly to fulfill the request.