The catalogue

Canadian privacy & access decisions

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

1,625 decisions matching
QuebecAct respecting access to documents held by public bodies and the protection of personal information
Quebec flag

2025 QCCAI 296 — Revenu Québec

Subscribe to open Quebec decisions.

Unlock this jurisdiction
QuebecAct respecting access to documents held by public bodies and the protection of personal information
Quebec flag

2025 QCCAI 302 — Ville de Gatineau

Subscribe to open Quebec decisions.

Unlock this jurisdiction
QuebecAct respecting access to documents held by public bodies and the protection of personal information
Quebec flag

2025 QCCAI 309 — Ville de Montréal - Service de police (SPVM)

Subscribe to open Quebec decisions.

Unlock this jurisdiction
QuebecAct respecting access to documents held by public bodies and the protection of personal information
Quebec flag

2025 QCCAI 310 — Ville de Mascouche

Subscribe to open Quebec decisions.

Unlock this jurisdiction
QuebecAct respecting access to documents held by public bodies and the protection of personal information
Quebec flag

2025 QCCAI 314 — Ville de L'Épiphanie

Subscribe to open Quebec decisions.

Unlock this jurisdiction
British ColumbiaFreedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act
British Columbia flag

The University of British Columbia's duty to assist

Subscribe to open British Columbia decisions.

Unlock this jurisdiction
British ColumbiaFreedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act
British Columbia flag

F25-74 — BC OIPC order 3026

Subscribe to open British Columbia decisions.

Unlock this jurisdiction
OntarioFreedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act
Ontario flag

Order PO-4730

Subscribe to open Ontario decisions.

Unlock this jurisdiction
QuebecAct respecting access to documents held by public bodies and the protection of personal information
Quebec flag

2025 QCCAI 281 — Régie incendie de l'Alliance des Grandes-Seigneuries

Subscribe to open Quebec decisions.

Unlock this jurisdiction
OntarioPersonal Health Information Protection Act
Ontario flag

CYFSA Decision 33 - 2025-09-24

Subscribe to open Ontario decisions.

Unlock this jurisdiction
Federal (Canada)Access to Information ActOIC Order (ATIA s.36.1, binding)
Federal (Canada) flag
Sep 24, 20255824-02520Indexed Apr 21, 2026

Canadian Security Intelligence Service, 5824-02520

The Information Commissioner ordered Canadian Security Intelligence Service to provide a complete response to the access request no later than 36 days following the date of the final report.

Quick view

Access to Information ActOIC Order (ATIA s.36.1, binding)

Canadian Security Intelligence Service, 5824-02520

Sep 24, 20255824-02520

The Information Commissioner ordered Canadian Security Intelligence Service to provide a complete response to the access request no later than 36 days following the date of the final report.

British ColumbiaPersonal Information Protection Act
British Columbia flag

Joint investigation of TikTok Pte Ltd.

Subscribe to open British Columbia decisions.

Unlock this jurisdiction
AlbertaPersonal Information Protection Act
Alberta flag

PIPA2025-IR-02

Subscribe to open Alberta decisions.

Unlock this jurisdiction
British ColumbiaPersonal Information Protection Act
British Columbia flag

Investigation Report 25-02

Subscribe to open British Columbia decisions.

Unlock this jurisdiction
Federal (Canada)Access to Information ActNot well-founded
Federal (Canada) flag
Sep 23, 20255825-01584Indexed Jun 30, 2026

5825-01584 — National Defence

National Defence

The complainant alleged that National Defence (DND) improperly refused to issue a new response letter after providing contextual information in its initial response to an access request. The request sought policy records, regulations, directives, orders, and instructions concerning the authority to generate Branch Standing Orders within the Canadian Armed Forces. DND's initial response stated that no responsive records were found but included additional information, such as hyperlinks to publicly available documents and an explanation using cautious language like "might," to assist the requester. The complainant argued this contextual information was speculative and not based on documented records, thus contravening DND's duty to assist under subsection 4(2.1) of the Access to Information Act. The OIC found that DND's inclusion of supplementary information, clearly distinguished from the official response, was an attempt to assist the requester in good faith and did not misrepresent the existence of records or create new ones. Therefore, DND was not obligated to issue a new response letter.

Quick view

Access to Information ActNot well-founded

5825-01584 — National Defence

Sep 23, 20255825-01584
Adjudicator: Caroline Maynard
Plain-Language Summary

The complainant alleged that National Defence (DND) improperly refused to issue a new response letter after providing contextual information in its initial response to an access request. The request sought policy records, regulations, directives, orders, and instructions concerning the authority to generate Branch Standing Orders within the Canadian Armed Forces. DND's initial response stated that no responsive records were found but included additional information, such as hyperlinks to publicly available documents and an explanation using cautious language like "might," to assist the requester. The complainant argued this contextual information was speculative and not based on documented records, thus contravening DND's duty to assist under subsection 4(2.1) of the Access to Information Act. The OIC found that DND's inclusion of supplementary information, clearly distinguished from the official response, was an attempt to assist the requester in good faith and did not misrepresent the existence of records or create new ones. Therefore, DND was not obligated to issue a new response letter.

Key Issues
  • Whether National Defence improperly refused to issue a new response letter
  • Whether the inclusion of contextual information in a 'no records' response contravenes the duty to assist under subsection 4(2.1) ATIA
  • Whether the contextual information was speculative and not grounded in documented records
  • Whether the institution's response was complete and appropriate under subsection 10(1) ATIA