The catalogue

Canadian privacy & access decisions

The comprehensive archive of federal, provincial, and territorial commissioner decisions — each with a plain-language summary.

16 decisions matching
Federal (Canada)Access to Information Acts.6.1 Application Granted (refusal authorized)
Federal (Canada) flag
Mar 10, 20222020 OIC 17Indexed Jun 30, 2026

Decision pursuant to 6.1, 2020 OIC 17

A federal institution

An unnamed federal institution applied to the Information Commissioner for approval to decline to act on an access request, alleging it was vexatious and an abuse of the right of access. The institution stated the requester had submitted 893 requests over 17 years, many closely related, due to dissatisfaction with how the institution handled their affairs. The Commissioner considered the definition of "vexatious" and "abuse of right," drawing on jurisprudence from other Canadian jurisdictions. The Commissioner found 11 of the requester's prior requests were duplicative or substantially similar, rejecting the requester's arguments for their necessity. Ultimately, the Commissioner concluded that the request was both vexatious and an abuse of the right of access, citing the large volume of requests, their repetitive nature, and recurring complaints to the OIC. The application was granted, allowing the institution to decline to act on the request.

Quick view

Access to Information Acts.6.1 Application Granted (refusal authorized)

Decision pursuant to 6.1, 2020 OIC 17

Mar 10, 20222020 OIC 17
Adjudicator: Caroline Maynard
Plain-Language Summary

An unnamed federal institution applied to the Information Commissioner for approval to decline to act on an access request, alleging it was vexatious and an abuse of the right of access. The institution stated the requester had submitted 893 requests over 17 years, many closely related, due to dissatisfaction with how the institution handled their affairs. The Commissioner considered the definition of "vexatious" and "abuse of right," drawing on jurisprudence from other Canadian jurisdictions. The Commissioner found 11 of the requester's prior requests were duplicative or substantially similar, rejecting the requester's arguments for their necessity. Ultimately, the Commissioner concluded that the request was both vexatious and an abuse of the right of access, citing the large volume of requests, their repetitive nature, and recurring complaints to the OIC. The application was granted, allowing the institution to decline to act on the request.

Key Issues
  • Whether the access request is vexatious under s.6.1(1) ATIA
  • Whether the access request constitutes an abuse of the right to make a request under s.6.1(1) ATIA
  • Whether the request is duplicative or substantially similar to previous requests
  • Whether the volume of requests, combined with other factors, supports a finding of abuse of right