Federal (Canada) Privacy Decisions

The complainant alleged that Employment and Social Development Canada (ESDC) did not conduct a reasonable search for records regarding complaints submitted to its Labour Program. ESDC initially missed key components of the request, resulting in an unreasonable search. Following the investigation, ESDC conducted additional searches, found more responsive records, and intends to provide them to the complainant. The Information Commissioner found the complaint well-founded and ordered ESDC to process and release the additional records.

• Reasonableness of the search conducted by the institution
• Completeness of the search in relation to the access request

The complainant alleged that the Privy Council Office (PCO) improperly withheld records concerning global warming or climate change, citing exemptions related to confidential government information, international affairs, national security, defence, and disclosure restrictions. The Information Commissioner found that PCO failed to demonstrate that the withheld information met the requirements for these exemptions, particularly regarding foreign government information and potential harm to Canada's international affairs or defence. Consequently, the complaint was found to be well-founded.

• Whether information regarding foreign governments was obtained in confidence and disclosure would cause harm (subsection 13(1) ATIA).
• Whether disclosure of names of CSIS and CSE employees could reasonably be expected to cause harm (subsection 15(1) ATIA).
• Whether disclosure of dissemination markings could reasonably be expected to cause harm to international affairs (subsection 15(1) ATIA).
• Whether disclosure of limited information regarding foreign governments could reasonably be expected to cause harm to international affairs (subsection 15(1) ATIA).

The complainant alleged that the Privy Council Office (PCO) did not conduct a reasonable search for records concerning allegations of an individual's ethics and associations. The investigation found that not all responsible offices were initially tasked, and a later search located 142 pages of responsive records. The Information Commissioner ordered PCO to provide a response to the access request within 36 business days.

• Reasonableness of search
• Completeness of search
• Identification of all relevant offices of primary interest

The complainant alleged that the Privy Council Office (PCO) did not conduct a reasonable search for records related to the management of the government's parliamentary agenda. The OIC investigation found that the initial search was inadequate, as additional relevant records were located during the investigation. The Commissioner ordered PCO to provide a supplementary response to the access request.

• Reasonableness of the search conducted by the institution
• Completeness of the search for specific parliamentary agenda records
• Identification and retrieval of all responsive records

The complainant requested records concerning a collision between a vessel and a seaplane. Transport Canada withheld information citing several exemptions, including conduct of investigations, personal information, third-party commercial/financial information, third-party negotiations, and accounts of deliberations. The Information Commissioner found that Transport Canada failed to justify the application of most exemptions and did not properly consider its discretion to disclose information for public interest reasons. Consequently, the Commissioner ordered Transport Canada to disclose most of the withheld information.

• Proper application of exemptions for conduct of investigations (s.16(1)(c) ATIA)
• Proper application of exemptions for personal information (s.19(1) ATIA)
• Proper application of exemptions for third-party commercial/financial information (s.20(1)(b) ATIA)
• Proper application of exemptions for third-party negotiations (s.20(1)(d) ATIA)
• Proper application of exemptions for accounts of deliberations (s.21(1)(b) ATIA)
• Institution's discretion to disclose information for public interest reasons (s.20(6) ATIA)

The complainant alleged that Library and Archives Canada (LAC) improperly withheld records concerning NORAD intelligence from 1958-1963, citing exemptions related to confidential information from government bodies and international affairs. During the investigation, LAC made two supplementary releases. The OIC found that while NORAD qualified as an international organization of states for the purpose of exemption 13(1)(b), not all the information LAC initially withheld met the exemption criteria. However, an order was deemed unnecessary as LAC had released further information and the remaining withheld records met the exemption requirements.

• Whether NORAD qualifies as an 'international organization of states' under subsection 13(1)(b) of the ATIA.
• Whether the withheld information was obtained in confidence from NORAD.
• Whether LAC properly applied exemptions under subsection 13(1) and subsection 15(1) of the ATIA.
• Whether LAC reasonably exercised its discretion to withhold information under subsection 13(2).

This investigation examined Staples Canada's practices concerning the removal of personal information from returned laptops resold through its Openbox program. The Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada (OPC) found that Staples had deficiencies in its policies, procedures, and employee training regarding data wiping. Specifically, the OPC determined that Staples did not consistently ensure full data sanitization according to manufacturer guidelines, leading to residual personal information being found on some devices. Staples agreed to implement corrective measures, including updating procedures, enhancing training, and engaging third-party spot checks.

• Adequacy of safeguards for personal information on returned electronic devices
• Sufficiency of Staples' policies and procedures for data wiping
• Effectiveness of employee training on data sanitization
• Compliance with PIPEDA Principles 4.7.1 and 4.7.3

This investigation concerned a privately owned swimming pool's policy requiring parents to consent to the use of photos and videos of their children for promotional purposes as a condition of enrolling them in swimming lessons. The OPC found that this requirement contravened PIPEDA principles regarding consent for the collection, use, and disclosure of personal information. The swimming pool has agreed to implement an opt-in photo policy, resolving the complaint.

• Whether requiring consent for promotional photos/videos as a condition of service violates PIPEDA.
• Whether photos/videos of children in swim attire are sensitive personal information.
• Whether the swimming pool's stated business needs justified the mandatory consent policy.
• Whether consent was sought appropriately for staff training purposes.

The complainant alleged that the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) failed to conduct a reasonable search for records concerning annual expenses incurred to provide security for internationally protected persons visiting Canada. The RCMP provided a two-page summary instead of retrieving the requested records, arguing that most would be exempt. The Information Commissioner found the search unreasonable, ordering the RCMP to conduct a new search and respond to the request.

• Reasonableness of search
• Failure to retrieve and process records
• Provision of summary in lieu of records

The complainant alleged that the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) improperly withheld and redacted information from an Issue Detail Report. The complainant also alleged the use of improper 'white' redactions. The Information Commissioner found the complaint well-founded, ordering the CFIA to disclose most of the withheld third-party information, except for supplier names, procedural details, and product weighing processes. The Commissioner also recommended the CFIA stop using white redactions.

• Application of subsection 19(1) (personal information)
• Application of paragraphs 20(1)(b) and 20(1)(c) (confidential third-party information, financial impact)
• Improper use of negative (white) redactions
• CFIA's duty to assist the requester

The complainant alleged that Employment and Social Development Canada (ESDC) improperly withheld records concerning CSL Group Inc. and failed to conduct a reasonable search. The Information Commissioner found that ESDC did not provide sufficient justification for withholding most of the information under various exemptions, including those related to law enforcement, personal information, third-party commercial information, and advice/deliberations. Additionally, the Commissioner found that ESDC's search for records was not reasonable. As a result, the Commissioner ordered ESDC to disclose most of the information and conduct a new search.

• Improper withholding of information under various ATIA exemptions
• Reasonableness of ESDC's search for records
• ESDC's failure to provide sufficient justification for exemptions
• ESDC's unreasonable exercise of discretion for paragraph 21(1)(a)

The complainant alleged that the Privy Council Office's (PCO) record-keeping practices for appointment processes did not comply with the Access to Information Act, specifically regarding interview notes. PCO stated that interview notes are considered transitory records, used to support deliberations, and are destroyed after appointments, with only the final advice letter to the Minister being the official record. The Commissioner found no evidence that records were destroyed with the intent to deny access, concluding the notes were transitory and their destruction did not violate the Act. The complaint was therefore not well founded.

• Whether PCO's practice of destroying interview notes constitutes non-compliance with the Access to Information Act.
• Whether the interview notes qualify as transitory records that can be disposed of.
• Whether the destruction of interview notes with intent to deny access constitutes an offence under section 67.1 of the Act.

The complainant alleged that Health Canada improperly withheld third-party information and failed to conduct a reasonable search. The request was for documents related to stakeholder consultations on drug regulations. The Information Commissioner found that Health Canada did not meet the requirements to exempt the third-party names under paragraph 20(1)(b) of the Access to Information Act, nor did it conduct a reasonable search. The Commissioner ordered Health Canada to disclose the third-party names and perform a new search.

• Exemption of third-party names under paragraph 20(1)(b)
• Reasonableness of the search conducted by the institution
• Definition of 'financial, commercial, scientific or technical information'
• Objective confidentiality of information

An institution applied to the Information Commissioner for approval to decline to act on an access request. The institution argued that the request was vexatious and an abuse of the right of access. The Commissioner agreed that the request was an abuse of the right of access and granted the institution approval to decline to act on it.

• Whether the access request is vexatious
• Whether the access request is an abuse of the right of access

The complainant alleged that the Privy Council Office (PCO) did not conduct a reasonable search for specific IAC reports from 1990 concerning the USSR and former Warsaw Pact countries. The OIC found that PCO initially failed to retrieve all relevant records, despite an additional search yielding 1,352 pages. PCO later identified 98 further pages. The Information Commissioner ordered PCO to provide a supplementary response by January 22, 2026, which PCO has agreed to implement.

• Reasonableness of the search conducted by PCO
• Completeness of the records provided
• Timeliness of the supplementary response