The catalogue

Canadian privacy & access decisions

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

1,324 decisions matching
QuebecAct respecting the protection of personal information in the private sector
Quebec flag

2022 QCCAI 360 — Lifeworks (Canada) Ltd.

Subscribe to open Quebec decisions.

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

Order PO-4326

Subscribe to open Ontario decisions.

Unlock this jurisdiction
Federal (Canada)Access to Information ActNot well-founded
Federal (Canada) flag
Dec 12, 20225820-01102Indexed Jun 30, 2026

5820-01102 — Environment and Climate Change Canada

Environment and Climate Change Canada

The complainant alleged that Environment and Climate Change Canada (ECCC) improperly excluded real-time and archived weather radar data under paragraph 68(a) of the Access to Information Act, claiming it was material available for purchase. ECCC stated that access to this weather data is provided as a cost-recovered service due to the costs involved in retrieval and preparation. The Commissioner found that the archived weather data was indeed available for purchase through a cost-recovery system, with various pricing tiers depending on the data package and region. Consequently, the Commissioner concluded that the Act does not apply to this information. The complaint was therefore deemed not well founded.

Quick view

Access to Information ActNot well-founded

5820-01102 — Environment and Climate Change Canada

Dec 12, 20225820-01102
Adjudicator: Caroline Maynard
Plain-Language Summary

The complainant alleged that Environment and Climate Change Canada (ECCC) improperly excluded real-time and archived weather radar data under paragraph 68(a) of the Access to Information Act, claiming it was material available for purchase. ECCC stated that access to this weather data is provided as a cost-recovered service due to the costs involved in retrieval and preparation. The Commissioner found that the archived weather data was indeed available for purchase through a cost-recovery system, with various pricing tiers depending on the data package and region. Consequently, the Commissioner concluded that the Act does not apply to this information. The complaint was therefore deemed not well founded.

Key Issues
  • Whether real-time weather radar data falls within the scope of an access request
  • Whether archived weather radar data is material available for purchase under paragraph 68(a) of the Access to Information Act
Federal (Canada)Access to Information ActOIC Order (ATIA s.36.1, binding)
Federal (Canada) flag
Dec 12, 20225822-03753Indexed Apr 21, 2026

National Defence, 5822-03753

The Information Commissioner ordered National Defence to provide a final response to the access request within 10 days of the coming into effect of the order.

Quick view

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

National Defence, 5822-03753

Dec 12, 20225822-03753

The Information Commissioner ordered National Defence to provide a final response to the access request within 10 days of the coming into effect of the order.

British ColumbiaFreedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act
British Columbia flag

F22-64 — BC OIPC order 2573

Subscribe to open British Columbia decisions.

Unlock this jurisdiction
Federal (Canada)Access to Information ActDiscontinued
Federal (Canada) flag
Dec 9, 20222022 OIC 48Indexed Jun 30, 2026

Decision under section 31, 2022 OIC 48

A federal institution

The complainant filed a complaint with the Office of the Information Commissioner (OIC) regarding an access request. The institution had responded to the access request by email, but the complainant inadvertently deleted the email before reviewing its contents. The complainant argued that the 60-day time limit for filing a complaint under section 31 of the Access to Information Act (ATIA) should begin from the date they became aware of the grounds for complaint, which was when they recovered and reviewed the deleted email. The OIC determined that the complaint was inadmissible because it was submitted outside the mandatory 60-day timeframe. The Commissioner clarified that the 60-day period begins the day after the requester receives the institution's response, not when they become aware of the grounds for complaint due to their own actions. The OIC concluded that the ATIA does not grant the Commissioner the power to extend this statutory time limit.

Quick view

Access to Information ActDiscontinued

Decision under section 31, 2022 OIC 48

Dec 9, 20222022 OIC 48
Adjudicator: Caroline Maynard
Plain-Language Summary

The complainant filed a complaint with the Office of the Information Commissioner (OIC) regarding an access request. The institution had responded to the access request by email, but the complainant inadvertently deleted the email before reviewing its contents. The complainant argued that the 60-day time limit for filing a complaint under section 31 of the Access to Information Act (ATIA) should begin from the date they became aware of the grounds for complaint, which was when they recovered and reviewed the deleted email. The OIC determined that the complaint was inadmissible because it was submitted outside the mandatory 60-day timeframe. The Commissioner clarified that the 60-day period begins the day after the requester receives the institution's response, not when they become aware of the grounds for complaint due to their own actions. The OIC concluded that the ATIA does not grant the Commissioner the power to extend this statutory time limit.

Key Issues
  • Whether the complaint was filed within the 60-day time limit prescribed by section 31 of the ATIA
  • Interpretation of 'in any other case' in section 31 of the ATIA regarding the start of the complaint period
  • Whether the Information Commissioner has the power to extend the 60-day time limit for filing a complaint
SaskatchewanLocal Authority Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act
Saskatchewan flag

REVIEW REPORT 223-2021 — City of Regina

Subscribe to open Saskatchewan decisions.

Unlock this jurisdiction
SaskatchewanLocal Authority Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act
Saskatchewan flag

Review Report 242-2021, 291-2021 — Rural Municipality of Clinworth No. 230 and Ministry of Parks, Culture and Sports

Subscribe to open Saskatchewan decisions.

Unlock this jurisdiction
OntarioPersonal Health Information Protection Act
Ontario flag

PHIPA DECISION 193

Subscribe to open Ontario decisions.

Unlock this jurisdiction
QuebecAct respecting the protection of personal information in the private sector
Quebec flag

2022 QCCAI 330 — Banque Amex du Canada

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

2022 QCCAI 331 — City of Montreal (Police Service) (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

2022 QCCAI 359 — Barreau du Québec (Bureau du syndic)

Subscribe to open Quebec decisions.

Unlock this jurisdiction
SaskatchewanLocal Authority Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act
Saskatchewan flag

Investigation Report 083-2022 — St. Paul's Roman Catholic Separate School Division No. 20

Subscribe to open Saskatchewan decisions.

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

Order PO-4325

Subscribe to open Ontario decisions.

Unlock this jurisdiction
QuebecAct respecting the protection of personal information in the private sector
Quebec flag

2022 QCCAI 329 — Banque de Montréal

Subscribe to open Quebec decisions.

Unlock this jurisdiction