Canadian privacy & access decisions

An institution applied to the Information Commissioner under subsection 6.1(1) of the Access to Information Act, seeking approval to decline to act on 72 access requests. The institution argued that these requests constituted an abuse of the right of access and were vexatious, citing their high volume, repetitive nature, and the burden they placed on resources. The Commissioner found that 71 of the 72 requests were an abuse of the right of access, concluding that those in Annex A were repetitive and those in Annex B were unduly systematic. While the institution did not prove the requests had a purpose other than obtaining information, the Commissioner noted the institution had fulfilled its duty to assist. Considering the minimal public interest in further disclosure given thousands of pages already released, and the disproportionate effort required, the Commissioner partially granted the application. The institution was approved to decline to act on 71 requests, but not one request related to ATIP training. The Commissioner also declined to impose limits on future requests.

• Whether the institution's application to decline to act on 72 access requests under s.6.1(1) ATIA should be granted
• Whether the access requests constituted an abuse of the right to make a request under s.6.1(1) ATIA
• Whether the access requests were vexatious under s.6.1(1) ATIA
• Whether the access requests were repetitive
• Whether the access requests were made with a purpose other than obtaining records or information
• Whether the access requests were unduly systematic
• Whether the institution fulfilled its duty to assist the requester under s.4(2.1) ATIA
• Whether the public interest in the records sought warranted granting or denying the application
• Whether the Commissioner should exercise discretion to grant the application
• Whether limits should be placed on future access requests from the requester