Miller Thomson - Lawyers | avocats
  • Contact Us
  • |
  • FRANÇAIS
  • Home
  • |
  • Our Firm
    • About Miller Thomson
    • Offices
    • Firm Leadership
    • Community Commitment
    • Diversity
    • Women's Leadership Initiative
    • Accessibility
  • |
  • Our People
  • |
  • Our Services
  • |
  • News & Events
    • Overview
    • News
    • Miller Thomson Seminars
    • Speaking Engagements
    • CPD Program
  • |
  • Publications
    • Overview
    • Newsletters
    • Communiqués & Updates
    • Articles
  • |
  • Multimedia
  • |
  • Careers
    • Overview
    • Lawyers
    • Law Students
    • Administrative Positions
  • |
  • Blog
  • Publications
  • /
  • Newsletters
  • /
  • Education Law Newsletter
  • /
  • September 2012
  • /
  • Staff Advice and Recommendations Not Publicly...
  • Email
  • Share
September 2012

Staff Advice and Recommendations Not Publicly Accessible Upon Request

Gillian Tuck Kutarna, Guelph

The Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (“FIPPA”) and its municipal equivalent provide that every person has a right of access to a record or a part of a record in the custody or under the control of the government of Ontario or a government institution, with certain exceptions.  One such exception allows the head of an institution to refuse disclosure when the record “would reveal advice or recommendations of a public servant, any other person employed in the service of an institution, or a consultant retained by the institution.”

The Ontario Court of Appeal recently considered the scope of this exception.  The Minister of Finance appealed a decision of the Privacy Commissioner who had ordered access to what were described by the court as “draft option papers”.

When interpreting what qualifies as the “advice or recommendations of a public servant”, which do not have to be released, compared to factual information or empirical reports which do, the Court of Appeal clarified that this exception was designed to protect the decision-making process within public institutions.  Therefore, where the content of the records in question relates to a suggested course of action and pertain to a decision that will ultimately be made, the exception can be applied. 

The Court found that the adjudicator for the Information and Privacy Commissioner erred in holding that to have the right to refuse disclosure, the records relating to a course of action must be communicated directly to the final decision-maker, or that the author must recommend a single course of action.  The Court held that a recommendation may suggest a preferred course of action, but “advice is also protected which may be no more than material that permits the drawing of inferences with respect to a suggested course of action ….”

As subsection 7(1) of the Municipal Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (MFIPPA) provides for the same exception as subsection 13(1) of FIPPA, this should reassure school board and municipal staff that they may continue to produce private advice and recommendations as part of a protected deliberative process. 

Back to issue

© Miller Thomson LLP, 2013. All Rights Reserved. All Intellectual Property Rights including copyright in this publication are owned by Miller Thomson LLP. This publication may be reproduced and distributed in its entirety provided no alterations are made to the form or content. Any other form of reproduction or distribution requires the prior written consent of Miller Thomson LLP which may be requested from the Editor(s).

This publication is provided as an information service and is a summary of current legal issues. This information is not meant as legal opinion and readers are cautioned not to act on information provided in this publication without seeking specific legal advice with respect to their unique circumstances.

Miller Thomson LLP uses your contact information to send you information on legal topics and firm events that may be of interest to you. It does not share your personal information outside the firm, except with subcontractors who have agreed to abide by its privacy policy and other rules. If you do not wish Miller Thomson to use your contact information in this manner, please notify us at newsletters@millerthomson.com and include "Privacy Request" in the subject line.

 

Message from the Editor

  • This is a publication of Miller Thomson's Education Law group. We encourage you to forward this email to anyone who might be interested. Complimentary subscriptions to this and other Miller Thomson publications are available by clicking here. Your comments and suggestions are most welcome and should be directed to ntymochenko@millerthomson.com.

    Contact Information: www.millerthomson.com 1.888.762.5559

Services

  • Education Law

Subscribe

Subscribe to Our Publications
© Miller Thomson LLP 2013. All Rights Reserved.
  • Site Map
  • |
  • Privacy Policy
  • |
  • Copyright & Use
  • |
  • Accessibility
  • |
  • Remote Access: Western Eastern
  • Vancouver
  • |
  • Calgary
  • |
  • Edmonton
  • |
  • Saskatoon
  • |
  • Regina
  • |
  • London
  • |
  • Kitchener-Waterloo
  • |
  • Guelph
  • |
  • Toronto
  • |
  • Markham
  • |
  • Montréal