Canadian Privacy Decisions

The complainant alleged that the Privy Council Office (PCO) failed to respond to an access request regarding government communications about the recognition of Yaroslav Hunka in September 2023 by the extended deadline. The OIC found that PCO did not respond by the April 7, 2025, extended due date and was deemed to have refused access. Despite the ongoing processing and consultations, the OIC found the delay unacceptable and ordered PCO to provide a complete response within 36 business days.

• Timeliness of response to access request
• Definition of a 'response' under the ATIA
• Effect of deemed refusal under subsection 10(3)
• Timeliness of implementing OIC order

An institution applied to the Information Commissioner for approval to decline an access request, arguing it was an abuse of the right to access information due to the large volume of Microsoft Teams messages requested. The Commissioner denied the application, finding the institution failed to provide sufficient evidence. The institution's calculations for the volume of messages were unreliable, and the Commissioner noted it is the institution's responsibility to build adequate capacity to process requests.

• Whether the access request is an abuse of the right of access under subsection 6.1(1) of the ATIA
• Whether the institution provided sufficient evidence to demonstrate the request would overburden its operations
• The institution's responsibility to ensure it has the operational capacity to process access requests

The complainant alleged that Shared Services Canada (SSC) improperly withheld information requested under the Access to Information Act. The request was for a report from Gartner, Inc. The complainant argued the information was wrongly withheld under exemptions related to personal information, third-party financial/commercial/scientific/technical information, financial impact on a third party, and negotiations by a third party. The Information Commissioner found that while some information met the criteria for exemption under paragraph 20(1)(b), SSC failed to demonstrate that other withheld information met exemption requirements or that reasonable severance was not possible. The Commissioner ordered SSC to re-exercise its discretion on certain information and disclose specific parts of the report.

• Improper withholding of information under exemptions 19(1), 20(1)(b), 20(1)(c), and 20(1)(d) of the ATIA.
• Whether information qualified as confidential third-party financial, commercial, scientific, or technical information under paragraph 20(1)(b).
• Whether reasonable severance was possible under section 25 of the ATIA.
• Whether SSC reasonably exercised its discretion to withhold information under subsection 16(2).

The complainant alleged that Parks Canada failed to respond to an access request within the extended deadline. The request concerned data on human activity and coastal erosion impacts in the Gulf Islands National Park Reserve, and records related to a park closure decision. Parks Canada cited technical issues, staffing shortages, and third-party consultations as reasons for the delay. The Information Commissioner found the complaint well-founded, ordering Parks Canada to provide a complete response by April 30, 2026.

• Failure to respond within statutory time limits.
• Justification for delays due to technical issues and staffing shortages.
• Balancing third-party consultation requirements with the right to timely access.

The complainant alleged that Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada (ISED) failed to respond to an access request within the extended deadline. The request sought records concerning parliamentary consideration of electric vehicle battery manufacturing facilities, related agreements, and the use of foreign workers. The investigation found that ISED did not respond by the required date and was deemed to have refused access. The delay was attributed to a lack of responsiveness from one of its offices. The Information Commissioner ordered ISED to provide a complete response within 60 business days.

• Timeliness of response to an access request
• Definition of a response under the ATIA
• Responsibility for delays within an institution