Jim Bronskill (applicant) v. Minister of Canadian Heritage (respondent) and Information Commissioner of Canada (intervener) (T ; 2011 FC 983)
|
|
- Doris Preston
- 5 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 Jim Bronskill (applicant) v. Minister of Canadian Heritage (respondent) and Information Commissioner of Canada (intervener) (T ; 2011 FC 983) Indexed As: Bronskill v. Canada (Minister of Canadian Heritage) Federal Court Noël, J. August 11, Summary: In 2005, a journalist sought access under the Access to Information Act (ATIA) to the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) dossier on Tommy Clement Douglas, a Canadian political figure, who died on February 24, The record originated from the RCMP's Security Intelligence Division, which was replaced by a civilian intelligence service, the Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS), in The dossier was in the possession of Library and Archives Canada (LAC). LAC consulted with CSIS as to the nature of the documentation and the applicability of the ATIA's exemptions. Thereafter, LAC refused to disclose certain portions of the dossier, relying on the international affairs and defence exemption (s. 15). The journalist complained to the Information Commissioner. The Information Commissioner found that the journalist's complaint was not justified. The Information Commissioner determined that the documents were properly withheld under s. 15. The journalist applied for judicial review under s. 41 of the Access to Information Act. Just before the public hearing, the LAC undertook a second review of the Douglas file and more information was released. The Federal Court allowed the journalist's application. The court concluded that the discretion exercised by the LAC in dealing with the material was not exercised in a reasonable manner. The court was not satisfied the information still withheld was retained in a manner consistent with s. 15. The LAC needed to do more to ensure consistency in disclosure. Further, the LAC needed to exercise its discretion in accordance with the factors set out by the court. The court returned the matter to the LAC for redetermination of what information should be released with the specific guidance to follow the court's reasons, their spirit and the examples set out by the court. Courts - Topic 1763 Powers - Appointment of counsel - Amicus curiae - Library and Archives Canada (LAC) refused to disclose certain portions of a RCMP dossier on Tommy Douglas, a Canadian political figure, requested by a journalist under the Access To Information Act (ATIA) - LAC relied on the national security exemption (ATIA, s. 15) - The journalist complained to the Information Commissioner, who found that the complaint was not justified - The journalist applied for judicial review (ATIA, s. 41) - The journalist requested that the court should avail itself of the broad powers provided by s. 50 of the ATIA in order to appoint an amicus curiae to help the court with its analysis and review of the documentation - The Federal Court held that the appointment of an amicus was not necessary in this case - The court stated, however, that "Without deciding this issue, the Court assumes for the purposes of this file only that the appointment of an amicus could
2 fall within the ambit of the broad powers of s. 50 of the ATIA" - See paragraphs 110 to 114. Crown - Topic 7161 Examination of public documents - Freedom of information - Legislation - General (incl. interpretation) - The Federal Court stated that the Access to Information Act (Can.) was "... unambiguous as to its scope and purpose. Firstly, the Act's purpose is to extend the public's right to access to information, and that the Act was not meant to 'limit in any way' access to government information (s. 2 of the Act). Section 2 of the Act also requires that the exemptions to the right of access should be 'limited and specific'. This limited scope of the exemptions provided in the Act is essential to the court's interpretation of any application brought forth, and courts have consistently recognized this policy objective as being a core component of the review of refusals of disclosure" - See paragraph 5. Crown - Topic 7161 Examination of public documents - Freedom of information - Legislation - General (incl. interpretation) - The Federal Court discussed the relationship between the Library and Archives of Canada Act and the Access to Information Act (Can.) - See paragraphs 16 to 25 - The court stated, inter alia, that "The Library and Archives of Canada Act... is inextricably linked to the [Access to Information] Act. The most obvious link in the present application is that LAC [Library and Archives Canada] is the respondent to the ATI [access to information] request, but over and above that, the Library and Archives of Canada Act should be considered in every review of an ATI request, regardless as to the department or decision-maker involved. The responsibilities conferred by s. 12 of the Library and Archives of Canada Act to the Librarian and Archivist, the head of LAC support this contention..." - See paragraph 16. Crown - Topic 7161 Examination of public documents - Freedom of information - Legislation - General (incl. interpretation) - [See Statutes - Topic 2617]. Crown - Topic 7162 Examination of public documents - Freedom of information - Legislation - Purpose of - The Federal Court stated that "the purpose of the Access to Information Act [Can.] is to enshrine an essential component of democracy: the public's right to government information (s. 2 of the Act)..." - See paragraph 4. Crown - Topic 7162 Examination of public documents - Freedom of information - Legislation - Purpose of - [See first Crown - Topic 7161]. Crown - Topic 7202 Examination of public documents - Freedom of information - Bars - Interpretation - [See both Crown - Topic 7161 and first and second Crown - Topic 7220].
3 Crown - Topic 7220 Examination of public documents - Freedom of information - Bars - Injury to international affairs - The Federal Court stated that the exemptions laid out in the Access to Information Act (Can.) were to be considered in two aspects by the reviewing court - "Firstly, exemptions in the Act are either class-based or injury-based. Class-based exemptions are typically involved when the nature of the documentation sought is sensitive in and of itself. For example, the section 13 exemption is related to information obtained from foreign governments, which, by its nature, is a class-based exemption. Injury-based exemptions require that the decision-maker analyze whether the release of information could be prejudicial to the interests articulated in the exemption. Section 15 is an injury-based exemption: the head of the government institution must assess whether the disclosure of information could 'be expected to be injurious to the conduct of international affairs, the defence of Canada or any state allied or associated with Canada or the detection, prevention or suppression of subversive or hostile activities'" - See paragraph 13. Crown - Topic 7220 Examination of public documents - Freedom of information - Bars - Injury to international affairs - The Federal Court stated that the exemptions laid out in the Access to Information Act (Can.) were to be considered in two aspects by the reviewing court - After first considering whether a particular exemption was class-based or injury based, the "The second component of the exemptions under the Act is to determine whether the exemption is mandatory or discretionary. In the case of mandatory exemptions, the provisions of the Act mandate that the decision-maker 'shall refuse to disclose' the records when they fall under the exemption (see, inter alia, s. 19 [personal information]). In the case of discretionary exemptions, the decision-maker 'may refuse' to disclose the record. Section 15 [injury to international affairs and defence of Canada exemption] is a discretionary exemption" - See paragraphs 13 and 15. Crown - Topic 7220 Examination of public documents - Freedom of information - Bars - Injury to international affairs - Library and Archives Canada (LAC) refused to disclose certain portions of a RCMP dossier on Tommy C. Douglas, a Canadian political figure, requested by a journalist under the Access To Information Act (ATIA) - The LAC relied on the national security exemption (ATIA, s. 15) - The journalist complained to the Information Commissioner, who found that the complaint was not justified - The journalist applied for judicial review (ATIA, s. 41) - The Federal Court discussed whether the documents were properly considered as s. 15 exempted documents, including how the LAC dealt with issues of current operational interest, human sources, technical sources (intercepts, surveillance, etc.), targets of "transitory nature", identity of RCMP officers, "incidental reporting" (where Douglas was only mentioned in passing) and the RCMP's assessment of Douglas - The court concluded that the discretion exercised by the LAC in dealing with the material was not exercised in a reasonable manner - The court was not satisfied the information still withheld was retained in a manner consistent with s The LAC needed to do more to ensure consistency in disclosure - Further, the LAC needed to exercise its discretion in accordance with the factors set out by the court - Thus the court
4 returned the matter to the LAC for redetermination - The court suggested that the LAC detail and evidence the steps and approach taken to its next review and how it exercised its discretion - See paragraphs 83 to 229. Crown - Topic 7220 Examination of public documents - Freedom of information - Bars - Injury to international affairs - Section 15 of the Access to Information Act (ATIA) allowed the head of a government institution to refuse disclosure of information which could, if released, reasonably be expected to be injurious to the conduct of international affairs, the defence of Canada or any state allied or associated with Canada or the detection, prevention or suppression of subversive or hostile activities - The Federal Court noted that the disclosure of information pertaining to human sources was directly anticipated as an exemption within s. 15(1)(f) of the ATIA - The court discussed generally the issue of protection of human sources within an ATIA request where the s. 15 exemption was raised - See paragraphs 140 to 155. Crown - Topic 7220 Examination of public documents - Freedom of information - Bars - Injury to international affairs - Section 15 of the Access to Information Act (ATIA) allowed the head of a government institution to refuse disclosure of information which could, if released, reasonably be expected to be injurious to the conduct of international affairs, the defence of Canada or any state allied or associated with Canada or the detection, prevention or suppression of subversive or hostile activities - The Federal Court discussed the factors to be considered in the exercise of the discretion given by s. 15 in a case involving a request for information from the Library and Archives Canada - See paragraphs 210 to 223. Crown - Topic defence - [See all Crown - Topic 7220]. Crown - Topic 7246 Examination of public documents - Freedom of information - Judicial review and appeals - Standard of review - The Federal Court discussed the applicable standard of review on an application under s. 41 of the Access to Information Act (ATIA) for review of a decision by the head of a government institution to refuse disclosure of information on the basis of the national security exemption (ATIA, s. 15) - The court held that for discretionary exemptions such as s. 15, a two step-analysis was required - The court first had to review whether the documents fell within the exemption claimed and second whether the discretion was exercised properly - The reasonableness standard applied to both issues on a review of an exemption under s "However, the Act's objectives and their interpretation by the courts is such that this discretion is on the lower end of the spectrum, and that the Court is given ample jurisdiction and powers to review the exemptions claimed, as well as the exercise of discretion... Therefore, some deference has to be given, but not to the point of neutralizing the role of the judiciary as provided for by the legislation" - See paragraphs 62 to 82.
5 Crown - Topic 7284 Examination of public documents - Freedom of information - Practice - Parties (incl. standing, interveners, amicus curiae, etc.) - [See Courts - Topic 1763]. Statutes - Topic 1831 Interpretation - Intrinsic aids - Preamble - General - The Federal Court looked to the preamble of the Library and Archives of Canada Act to determine the purpose of the legislation - See paragraph 20. Statutes - Topic 2617 Interpretation - Interpretation of words and phrases - Modern rule (incl. interpretation by context) - Harmonization of statutes (incl. presumption of coherence) - The Federal Court stated that "Not only do the principles of statutory interpretation allow for consideration of statutes adopted on similar issues, the coherence of the Canadian legal order requires that the inherent principles of statutes in similar matters be considered fully complementary, especially in an issue as important as access to information. It is clear that the complimentary purposes of the [Access to Information] Act and the Library and Archives Act of Canada are such that they are inextricably linked, as would the aims of the Privacy Act if it was to be considered by the Court in the present application" - See paragraph 22. Cases Noticed: Information Commissioner (Can.) v. Canada (Minister of National Defence) (2011), 416 N.R. 105; 2011 SCC 25, refd to. [para. 4]. Canada Post Corp. v. Canada (Minister of Public Works) et al., [1995] 2 F.C. 110; 179 N.R. 350 (F.C.A.), refd to. [para. 5]. Information Commissioner (Can.) v. Royal Canadian Mounted Police (Commissioner), [2003] 1 S.C.R. 66; 301 N.R. 41; 2003 SCC 8, refd to. [para. 5]. Rubin v. Canada (Minister of Transport), [1998] 2 FC 430; 221 N.R. 145 (F.C.A.), refd to. [para. 5] Canada Inc. et al. v. Canada (Minister of Industry), [2002] 1 F.C. 421; 282 N.R. 284; 2001 FCA 254, refd to. [para. 9]. Telezone Inc. v. Canada (Minister of Industry) - see Canada Inc. et al. v. Canada (Minister of Industry). R. v. Ulybel Enterprises Ltd., [2001] 2 S.C.R. 867; 275 N.R. 201; 206 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 304; 618 A.P.R. 304; 2001 SCC 56, refd to. [para. 23]. Blank et al. v. Canada (Minister of the Environment) (2001), 281 N.R. 388; 2001 FCA 374, dist. [para. 24]. Ruby v. Royal Canadian Mounted Police et al., [2002] 4 S.C.R. 3; 295 N.R. 353; 2002 SCC 75, refd to. [para. 41]. Kitson v. Canada (2009), 354 F.T.R. 201; 2009 FC 1000, refd to. [para. 41]. Attaran v. Canada (Minister of Foreign Affairs), [2011] N.R. TBEd. SE.020; 2011 FCA 182, refd to. [para. 41]. Maislin Industries Ltd. v. Canada (Minister for Industry, Trade and Commerce), [1984] 1 F.C. 939 (T.D.), refd to. [para. 41].
6 Statham v. Canadian Broadcasting Corp. (President) et al. (2010), 409 N.R. 350; 2010 FCA 315, refd to. [para. 50]. Byer v. Information Commissioner (Can.), [2004] F.T.R. Uned. 38; 2004 FC 119, refd to. [para. 54]. Steinhoff v. Canada (Minister of Communications) (1998), 83 C.P.R.(3d) 380 (F.C.T.D.), refd to. [para. 64]. X. v. Canada (Minister of National Defence) (1992), 58 F.T.R. 93 (T.D.), refd to. [para. 64]. New Brunswick (Board of Management) v. Dunsmuir, [2008] 1 S.C.R. 190; 372 N.R. 1; 329 N.B.R.(2d) 1; 844 A.P.R. 1; 2008 SCC 9, refd to. [para. 64]. Khosa v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration), [2009] 1 S.C.R. 339; 385 N.R. 206; 2009 SCC 12, refd to. [para. 64]. Information Commissioner (Can.) v. Canada (Minister of Industry) (2001), 274 N.R. 341; 2001 FCA 253, refd to. [para. 68]. Sherman v. Canada (Minister of National Revenue) (2002), 222 F.T.R. 145; 2002 FCT 586, refd to. [para. 68]. Hien Do-Ky Vietnamese Refugee Sponsorship Committee v. Canada (Minister of Foreign Affairs and International Trade) (1999), 241 N.R. 308 (F.C.A.), refd to. [para. 69]. Do-Ky - see Hien Do-KyVietnamese Refugee Sponsorship Committee v. Canada (Minister of Foreign Affairs and International Trade). Information Commissioner (Can.) v. Prime Minister (Can.), [1993] 1 F.C. 427; 57 F.T.R. 180 (T.D.), refd to. [para. 69]. Canada Packers Inc. v. Canada (Minister of Agriculture) et al., [1989] 1 F.C. 47; 87 N.R. 81; 26 C.P.R.(3d) 407 (F.C.A.), refd to. [para. 70]. Hein Do-Ky Vietnamese Refugee Sponsorship Committee v. Canada (Minister of Foreign Affairs and International Trade), [1997] 2 F.C. 907; 126 F.T.R. 81 (T.D.), refd to. [para. 73]. Criminal Lawyers' Association (Ont.) v. Ontario (Minister of Public Safety and Security), [2010] 1 S.C.R. 815; 402 N.R. 350; 262 O.A.C. 258; 2010 SCC 23, refd to. [para. 73]. Ruby v. Royal Canadian Mounted Police et al., [2000] 3 F.C. 589; 256 N.R. 278 (F.C.A.), refd to. [para. 77]. Information Commissioner (Can.) v. Royal Canadian Mounted Police (Commissioner), [2003] 1 S.C.R. 66; 301 N.R. 41; 2003 SCC 8, refd to. [para. 78]. Canadian Council of Christian Charities v. Canada (Minister of Finance) (1999), 168 F.T.R. 49; 99 D.T.C (T.D.), refd to. [para. 82]. Saint John Shipbuilding Ltd. v. Canada (Minister of Supply and Services) (1988), 24 F.T.R. 32 (T.D.), refd to. [para. 100]. Khadr v. Canada (Attorney General), [2008] 3 F.C.R. 306; 322 F.T.R. 256; 2008 FC 46, refd to. [para. 111]. Sherman v. Minister of National Revenue, [2004] F.T.R. Uned. 835; 2004 FC 1423, refd to. [para. 125]. Rubin v. Canada Mortgage and Housing Corp. (President), [1989] 1 F.C. 265; 86 N.R. 186 (F.C.A.), refd to. [para. 125]. X. v. Canada (Minister of National Defence), [1992] 1 F.C. 77; 46 F.T.R. 206 (T.D.), refd to. [para. 130].
7 Carey v. Ontario et al., [1986] 2 S.C.R. 637; 72 N.R. 81; 20 O.A.C. 81, refd to. [para. 131]. Canada (Attorney General) v. Commission of Inquiry into the Actions of Canadian Officials in Relation to Maher Arar et al. (2007), 316 F.T.R. 279; 2007 FC 766, refd to. [para. 131]. Blank v. Canada (Minister of Justice), [2007] N.R. Uned. 82; 2007 FCA 147, refd to. [para. 134]. Babcock et al. v. Canada (Attorney General) et al., [2002] 3 S.C.R. 3; 289 N.R. 341; 168 B.C.A.C. 50; 275 W.A.C. 50; 2002 SCC 57, refd to. [para. 134]. Harkat, Re, [2009] 4 F.C.R. 370; 339 F.T.R. 65; 2009 FC 204, refd to. [para. 144]. Canada (Attorney General) v. Almalki et al. (2010), 377 F.T.R. 186; 2010 FC 1106, varied [2011] N.R. TBEd. JL.019; 2011 FCA 199, refd to. [para. 144]. Bisaillon v. Keable, [1983] 2 S.C.R. 60; 51 N.R. 81, refd to. [para. 146]. R. v. Leipert (R.D.), [1997] 1 S.C.R. 281; 207 N.R. 145; 85 B.C.A.C. 162; 138 W.A.C. 162, refd to. [para. 146]. Vancouver Sun et al. v. Canada (Attorney General) et al., [2007] 3 S.C.R. 253; 368 N.R. 112; 368 B.C.A.C. 1; 409 W.A.C. 1; 2007 SCC 43, refd to. [para. 146]. R. v. National Post et al., [2010] 1 S.C.R. 477; 401 N.R. 104; 262 O.A.C. 1; 2010 SCC 16, refd to. [para. 147]. CTVglobemedia Publishing Inc. v. Canada (Attorney General) et al., [2010] 2 S.C.R. 592; 407 N.R. 202; 2010 SCC 41, refd to. [para. 147]. Charkaoui, Re, [2009] 1 F.C.R. 507; 316 F.T.R. 236; 2008 FC 61, refd to. [para. 148]. Saint John Shipbuilding Ltd. v. Canada (Minister of Supply and Services) (1990), 107 N.R. 89; 67 D.L.R.(4th) 315 (F.C.A.), refd to. [para. 175]. Murchison v. Export Development Canada (2009), 354 F.T.R. 18; 2009 FC 77, refd to. [para. 182]. Attaran v. Canada (Minister of Foreign Affairs) (2009), 342 F.T.R. 82; 2009 CarswellNat 781; 2009 FC 339, refd to. [para. 196]. Statutes Noticed: Access to Information Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. A-1, sect. 2 [para. 5]; sect. 10 [para. 7]; sect. 15, sect. 19 [para. 12]; sect. 41 [para. 1]; sect. 49 [para. 66]; sect. 50 [para. 62]. Library and Archives of Canada Act, S.C. 2004, c. 11, preamble [para. 19]; sect. 7 [para. 18]; sect. 12(1) [para. 16]. Authors and Works Noticed: Côté, Pierre André, Beaulac, Stéphane, and Devinat, Mathieu, Interprétation des lois (4th Ed. 2009), para. 226 [para. 20]. Royal Commission of Inquiry into Certain Activities of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, vol. 1, pp. 422 [para. 159]; 466 [para. 160]; 468, 474 [para. 163]; 480 [para. 165]; 482 [para. 162]. Sullivan, Ruth, Sullivan on the Construction of Statutes (5th Ed. 2008), pp. 217 [para. 20]; 412 [para. 22]. Counsel: Paul Champ and Prof. Amir Attaran, for the applicant;
8 Gregory S. Tzemenakis, for the respondent; Patricia Boyd, for the intervener. Solicitors of Record: Champ & Associates, Ottawa, Ontario, for the applicant; Myles J. Kirvan, Deputy Attorney General of Canada, Ottawa, Ontario, for the respondent; Senior Counsel, Office of the Information Commissioner of Canada, Ottawa, Ontario, for the intervener. This application was heard in Ottawa, Ontario, by way of public hearings on February 23 and April 28, 2010, and a closed hearing on November 30, 2010, before Noël, J., of the Federal Court, who delivered the following decision on August 11, Editor: Elizabeth M.A. Turgeon Order accordingly. Crown - Topic 7161 Examination of public documents - Freedom of information - Legislation - General (incl. interpretation) - The Federal Court stated that "Not only do the principles of statutory interpretation allow for consideration of statutes adopted on similar issues, the coherence of the Canadian legal order requires that the inherent principles of statutes in similar matters be considered fully complementary, especially in an issue as important as access to information. It is clear that the complimentary purposes of the [Access to Information] Act and the Library and Archives Act of Canada are such that they are inextricably linked, as would the aims of the Privacy Act if it was to be considered by the Court in the present application" - See paragraph 22. Crown - Topic 7162 Examination of public documents - Freedom of information - Legislation - Purpose of - The Federal Court stated that the Access to Information Act (Can.) was "... unambiguous as to its scope and purpose. Firstly, the Act's purpose is to extend the public's right to access to information, and that the Act was not meant to 'limit in any way' access to government information (s. 2 of the Act). Section 2 of the Act also requires that the exemptions to the right of access should be 'limited and specific'. This limited scope of the exemptions provided in the Act is essential to the court's interpretation of any application brought forth, and courts have consistently recognized this policy objective as being a core component of the review of refusals of disclosure" - See paragraph 5. Crown - Topic 7202 Examination of public documents - Freedom of information - Bars - Interpretation - The Federal Court stated that the Access to Information Act (Can.) was "... unambiguous as to its scope and purpose. Firstly, the Act's purpose is to extend the public's right to access to information, and that the Act was not meant to 'limit in any way' access to government
9 information (s. 2 of the Act). Section 2 of the Act also requires that the exemptions to the right of access should be 'limited and specific'. This limited scope of the exemptions provided in the Act is essential to the court's interpretation of any application brought forth, and courts have consistently recognized this policy objective as being a core component of the review of refusals of disclosure" - See paragraph 5. Crown - Topic 7202 Examination of public documents - Freedom of information - Bars - Interpretation - The Federal Court discussed the relationship between the Library and Archives of Canada Act and the Access to Information Act (Can.) - See paragraphs 16 to 25 - The court stated, inter alia, that "The Library and Archives of Canada Act... is inextricably linked to the [Access to Information] Act. The most obvious link in the present application is that LAC [Library and Archives Canada] is the respondent to the ATI [access to information] request, but over and above that, the Library and Archives of Canada Act should be considered in every review of an ATI request, regardless as to the department or decisionmaker involved. The responsibilities conferred by s. 12 of the Library and Archives of Canada Act to the Librarian and Archivist, the head of LAC support this contention..." - See paragraph 16. Crown - Topic 7202 Examination of public documents - Freedom of information - Bars - Interpretation - The Federal Court stated that the exemptions laid out in the Access to Information Act (Can.) were to be considered in two aspects by the reviewing court - "Firstly, exemptions in the Act are either class-based or injury-based. Class-based exemptions are typically involved when the nature of the documentation sought is sensitive in and of itself. For example, the section 13 exemption is related to information obtained from foreign governments, which, by its nature, is a class-based exemption. Injury-based exemptions require that the decision-maker analyze whether the release of information could be prejudicial to the interests articulated in the exemption. Section 15 is an injury-based exemption: the head of the government institution must assess whether the disclosure of information could 'be expected to be injurious to the conduct of international affairs, the defence of Canada or any state allied or associated with Canada or the detection, prevention or suppression of subversive or hostile activities'" - See paragraph 13. Crown - Topic 7202 Examination of public documents - Freedom of information - Bars - Interpretation - The Federal Court stated that the exemptions laid out in the Access to Information Act (Can.) were to be considered in two aspects by the reviewing court - After first considering whether a particular exemption was class-based or injury based, the "The second component of the exemptions under the Act is to determine whether the exemption is mandatory or discretionary. In the case of mandatory exemptions, the provisions of the Act mandate that the decision-maker 'shall refuse to disclose' the records when they fall under the exemption (see, inter alia, s. 19 [personal information]). In the case of discretionary exemptions, the decision-maker 'may refuse' to disclose the record. Section 15 [injury to international affairs and defence of Canada exemption] is a discretionary exemption" - See paragraphs 13 and 15.
10 Crown - Topic defence - The Federal Court stated that the exemptions laid out in the Access to Information Act (Can.) were to be considered in two aspects by the reviewing court - "Firstly, exemptions in the Act are either class-based or injury-based. Class-based exemptions are typically involved when the nature of the documentation sought is sensitive in and of itself. For example, the section 13 exemption is related to information obtained from foreign governments, which, by its nature, is a class-based exemption. Injury-based exemptions require that the decision-maker analyze whether the release of information could be prejudicial to the interests articulated in the exemption. Section 15 is an injury-based exemption: the head of the government institution must assess whether the disclosure of information could 'be expected to be injurious to the conduct of international affairs, the defence of Canada or any state allied or associated with Canada or the detection, prevention or suppression of subversive or hostile activities'" - See paragraph 13. Crown - Topic defence - The Federal Court stated that the exemptions laid out in the Access to Information Act (Can.) were to be considered in two aspects by the reviewing court - After first considering whether a particular exemption was class-based or injury based, the "The second component of the exemptions under the Act is to determine whether the exemption is mandatory or discretionary. In the case of mandatory exemptions, the provisions of the Act mandate that the decision-maker 'shall refuse to disclose' the records when they fall under the exemption (see, inter alia, s. 19 [personal information]). In the case of discretionary exemptions, the decision-maker 'may refuse' to disclose the record. Section 15 [injury to international affairs and defence of Canada exemption] is a discretionary exemption" - See paragraphs 13 and 15. Crown - Topic defence - Library and Archives Canada (LAC) refused to disclose certain portions of a RCMP dossier on Tommy C. Douglas, a Canadian political figure, requested by a journalist under the Access To Information Act (ATIA) - The LAC relied on the national security exemption (ATIA, s. 15) - The journalist complained to the Information Commissioner, who found that the complaint was not justified - The journalist applied for judicial review (ATIA, s. 41) - The Federal Court discussed whether the documents were properly considered as s. 15 exempted documents, including how the LAC dealt with issues of current operational interest, human sources, technical sources (intercepts, surveillance, etc.), targets of "transitory nature", identity of RCMP officers, "incidental reporting" (where Douglas was only mentioned in passing) and the RCMP's assessment of Douglas - The court concluded that the discretion exercised by the LAC in dealing with the material was not exercised in a reasonable manner - The court was not satisfied the information still withheld was retained in a manner consistent with s The LAC needed to do more to ensure consistency in disclosure - Further, the LAC needed to
11 exercise its discretion in accordance with the factors set out by the court - Thus the court returned the matter to the LAC for redetermination - The court suggested that the LAC detail and evidence the steps and approach taken to its next review and how it exercised its discretion - See paragraphs 83 to 229. Crown - Topic defence - Section 15 of the Access to Information Act (ATIA) allowed the head of a government institution to refuse disclosure of information which could, if released, reasonably be expected to be injurious to the conduct of international affairs, the defence of Canada or any state allied or associated with Canada or the detection, prevention or suppression of subversive or hostile activities - The Federal Court noted that the disclosure of information pertaining to human sources was directly anticipated as an exemption within s. 15(1)(f) of the ATIA - The court discussed generally the issue of protection of human sources within an ATIA request where the s. 15 exemption was raised - See paragraphs 140 to 155. Crown - Topic defence - Section 15 of the Access to Information Act (ATIA) allowed the head of a government institution to refuse disclosure of information which could, if released, reasonably be expected to be injurious to the conduct of international affairs, the defence of Canada or any state allied or associated with Canada or the detection, prevention or suppression of subversive or hostile activities - The Federal Court discussed the factors to be considered in the exercise of the discretion given by s. 15 in a case involving a request for information from the Library and Archives Canada - See paragraphs 210 to 223. Crown - Topic 7284 Examination of public documents - Freedom of information - Practice - Parties (incl. standing, interveners, amicus curiae, etc.) - Library and Archives Canada (LAC) refused to disclose certain portions of a RCMP dossier on Tommy Douglas, a Canadian political figure, requested by a journalist under the Access To Information Act (ATIA) - LAC relied on the national security exemption (ATIA, s. 15) - The journalist complained to the Information Commissioner, who found that the complaint was not justified - The journalist applied for judicial review (ATIA, s. 41) - The journalist requested that the court should avail itself of the broad powers provided by s. 50 of the ATIA in order to appoint an amicus curiae to help the court with its analysis and review of the documentation - The Federal Court held that the appointment of an amicus was not necessary in this case - The court stated, however, that "Without deciding this issue, the Court assumes for the purposes of this file only that the appointment of an amicus could fall within the ambit of the broad powers of s. 50 of the ATIA" - See paragraphs 110 to 114.
Indexed As: Information Commissioner (Can.) v. Canada (Minister of National Defence)
Information Commissioner of Canada (appellant) v. Minister of National Defence (respondent) and Canadian Civil Liberties Association, Canadian Newspaper Association, Ad IDEM/Canadian Media Lawyers Association
More informationMaritime Broadcasting System Limited (applicant) v. Canadian Media Guild (respondent) (A ; 2014 FCA 59)
Maritime Broadcasting System Limited (applicant) v. Canadian Media Guild (respondent) (A-534-12; 2014 FCA 59) Indexed As: Maritime Broadcasting System Ltd. v. Canadian Media Guild Federal Court of Appeal
More informationIndexed As: Kimoto et al. v. Canada (Attorney General) et al. Federal Court of Appeal Evans, Layden-Stevenson and Stratas, JJ.A. October 19, 2011.
Doug Kimoto, Vic Amos and West Coast Trollers (Area G) Association on behalf of all Area G Troll Licence Holders (appellants) v. The Attorney General of Canada, Gulf Trollers Association (Area H) and Area
More informationHomeaway.com, Inc. (applicant) v. Martin Hrdlicka (respondent) (T ; 2012 FC 1467) Indexed As: Homeaway.com Inc. v. Hrdlicka
Homeaway.com, Inc. (applicant) v. Martin Hrdlicka (respondent) (T-1497-12; 2012 FC 1467) Indexed As: Homeaway.com Inc. v. Hrdlicka Federal Court Hughes, J. December 12, 2012. Summary: HomeAway.com Inc.,
More informationIndexed As: Workers' Compensation Board (P.E.I.) v. J & B Administrative Services Inc.
Workers' Compensation Board of Prince Edward Island (appellant) v. J & B Administrative Services Inc. (respondent) and Workers' Compensation Appeal Tribunal (respondent) (S1-CA-1262; 2014 PECA 2) Indexed
More informationIndexed As: Walker v. British Columbia Securities Commission
Andrew Gordon Walker (appellant) v. British Columbia (Securities Commission) (respondent) (CA038350; 2011 BCCA 415) Indexed As: Walker v. British Columbia Securities Commission British Columbia Court of
More informationIndexed As: Gimbel et al. v. Alberta (Minister of Public Works, Supply and Services)
Howard Vance Gimbel, Judith Anne Gimbel and Carl Management Ltd. (appellants/claimants) v. Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Alberta, as Represented by the Minister of Public Works, Supply & Services (Now
More informationIndexed As: Masterpiece Inc. v. Alavida Lifestyles Inc.
Masterpiece Inc. (appellant) v. Alavida Lifestyles Inc. (respondent) and International Trademark Association (intervenor) (33459; 2011 SCC 27; 2011 CSC 27) Indexed As: Masterpiece Inc. v. Alavida Lifestyles
More informationFederal Court Decisions
Decisions > Federal Court Decisions > Djilani v. Canada (Foreign Affairs and International Trade) Federal Court Decisions Case name: Djilani v. Canada (Foreign Affairs and International Trade) Court (s)
More informationReasons and decision Motifs et décision
Reasons and decision Motifs et décision RAD File No. / N de dossier de la SAR : VB3-02197 Private Proceeding / Huis clos Person(s) who is(are) XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Personne(s) en cause the subject of the
More informationIndexed As: VSL Canada Ltd. v. Workplace Health, Safety and Compensation Commission (N.B.) et al.
VSL Canada Ltd. (appellant) v. Workplace Health, Safety and Compensation Commission, Dennis Duguay, Florent McGraw, Paul Emile Robichaud, Alderio Rousselle, Billy Joe Rousselle, Jacques Roussel and Marc
More informationMarch 13, Dear Minister: Tax Court of Canada
March 13, 2008 The Honourable Robert D. Nicholson, P.C., Q.C., M.P. Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada East Memorial Building, 4th Floor 284 Wellington Street Ottawa, ON K1A 0H8 Dear Minister:
More informationDate: Docket: A CORAM: DESJARDINS J.A. TRUDEL J.A. Citation: 2007 FCA 397 BETWEEN: SNC LAVALIN INC. Appellant and THE MINISTER FOR INT
Date: 20071212 Docket: A-309-03 CORAM: DESJARDINS J.A. TRUDEL J.A. Citation: 2007 FCA 397 BETWEEN: SNC LAVALIN INC. Appellant and THE MINISTER FOR INTERNATIONAL CO-OPERATION and THE MINISTER OF FOREIGN
More informationSecurity Intelligence Review Committee Estimates
Security Intelligence Review Committee 2010-11 Estimates Part III Report on Plans and Priorities The Right Honourable Stephen Harper Prime Minister of Canada Table of Contents Chair s Message... 1 SECTION
More informationIndexed As: Siena-Foods Ltd. (Bankrupt) v. Old Republic Insurance Co. of Canada et al.
Siena-Foods Limited, a Bankrupt, by its Trustee Deloitte & Touche Inc. (applicant/appellant) v. Old Republic Insurance Company of Canada and Intact Insurance Company (respondents/respondent) (C54769; 2012
More informationReasons and decision Motifs et décision
Reasons and decision Motifs et décision RAD File No. / N de dossier de la SAR : VB3-02617 Private Proceeding / Huis clos Person(s) who is(are) XXXX XXXX Personne(s) en cause the subject of the appeal Appeal
More informationIndexed As: McCann et al. v. Canada Mortgage and Housing Corp. et al. Ontario Court of Appeal Doherty, Laskin and Simmons, JJ.A. April 18, 2012.
Nicole Lacroix and Rosie Ladouceur (plaintiffs/appellants) v. Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation and Marc Rochon, Claude Poirier-Defoy, Jim Millar, Karen Kinsley, Gerald Norbraten, Jean-Guy Tanguay,
More informationRICARDO COMPANIONI. and THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION. and HIV & AIDS LEGAL CLINIC (ONTARIO) REASONS FOR ORDER AND ORDER
Federal Court Cour fédérale Date: 20091231 Docket: IMM-2616-09 Citation: 2009 FC 1315 Ottawa, Ontario, December 31, 2009 PRESENT: The Honourable Mr. Justice Harrington BETWEEN: RICARDO COMPANIONI Applicant
More informationCitation: Korsch v. Human Rights Commission Date: (Man.) et al., 2012 MBCA 108 Docket: AI IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF MANITOBA
Citation: Korsch v. Human Rights Commission Date: 20121113 (Man.) et al., 2012 MBCA 108 Docket: AI 12-30-07792 Coram: B E T W E E N : IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF MANITOBA Madam Justice Barbara M. Hamilton
More informationSUPREME COURT OF CANADA. CITATION: John Doe v. Ontario (Finance), 2014 SCC 36 DATE: DOCKET: 34828
SUPREME COURT OF CANADA CITATION: John Doe v. Ontario (Finance), 2014 SCC 36 DATE: 20140509 DOCKET: 34828 BETWEEN: John Doe, Requester Appellant and Minister of Finance for the Province of Ontario Respondent
More informationMINISTRY OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
THE ESTIMATES, 1 The Ministry of the Attorney General is responsible for the administration and delivery of justice services to all communities in Ontario. The Ministry co-ordinates the administration
More informationOrder MINISTRY OF PUBLIC SAFETY & SOLICITOR GENERAL
Order 03-21 MINISTRY OF PUBLIC SAFETY & SOLICITOR GENERAL David Loukidelis, Information and Privacy Commissioner May 14, 2003 Quicklaw Cite: [2003] B.C.I.P.C.D. No. 21 Document URL: http://www.oipc.bc.ca/orders/order03-21.pdf
More informationOrder F17-08 MINISTRY OF PUBLIC SAFETY AND SOLICITOR GENERAL. Celia Francis Adjudicator. February 21, 2017
Order F17-08 MINISTRY OF PUBLIC SAFETY AND SOLICITOR GENERAL Celia Francis Adjudicator February 21, 2017 CanLII Cite: 2017 BCIPC 09 Quicklaw Cite: [2017] B.C.I.P.C.D. No. 09 Summary: The Ministry disclosed
More informationTHE HONOURABLE FRANCIS J.C. NEWBOULD. and ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA. Heard at Ottawa, Ontario, on May 16, 2017.
Date: 20170519 Docket: A-118-17 Citation: 2017 FCA 106 CORAM: PELLETIER J.A. TRUDEL J.A. RENNIE J.A. BETWEEN: THE HONOURABLE FRANCIS J.C. NEWBOULD Applicant (Appellant) and ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA Respondent
More information$1 Items included in these Supplementary Estimates
The following table presents authorities requested by organizations in $1 items. The underlined text indicates the authority being sought. Agriculture and Agri-Food Agriculture and Agri-Food Atlantic Canada
More informationand HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN, Motion heard on November 19, 2014 at Montréal, Québec. Before: The Honourable Justice Gerald J.
BETWEEN: J.G. GUY SIMARD, and HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN, Docket: 2014-2454(IT)G Appellant, Respondent. Appearances: Motion heard on November 19, 2014 at Montréal, Québec. Before: The Honourable Justice Gerald
More informationand HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN, Appeal heard on June 6, 2013, at Edmonton, Alberta. Before: The Honourable Justice David E. Graham
BETWEEN: D & D LIVESTOCK LTD., and HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN, Docket: 2011-137(IT)G Appellant, Respondent. Appeal heard on June 6, 2013, at Edmonton, Alberta. Appearances: Before: The Honourable Justice David
More informationSUPREME COURT OF CANADA
SUPREME COURT OF CANADA CITATION: Montréal (City) v. Montreal Port Authority, 2010 SCC 14 DATE: 20100415 DOCKET: 32881, 32882 BETWEEN: AND BETWEEN: City of Montréal Appellant and Montreal Port Authority
More informationORDER MO Appeal MA Brantford Police Services Board. September 6, 2018
ORDER MO-3655 Appeal MA15-246 Brantford Police Services Board September 6, 2018 Summary: The appellant made an access request under the Act to the police for records relating to a homicide investigation
More informationFord Credit Canada Limited (plaintiff) v. Welcome Ford Sales Ltd. and Royle Smith (defendants) ( , BK ; 2010 ABQB 798)
Ford Credit Canada Limited (plaintiff) v. Welcome Ford Sales Ltd. and Royle Smith (defendants) (1003 00638, BK03 115383; 2010 ABQB 798) Indexed As: Ford Credit Canada Ltd. v. Welcome Ford Sales Ltd. et
More informationHOLY ALPHA AND OMEGA CHURCH OF TORONTO. and ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA. Dealt with in writing without appearance of parties.
Date: 20090331 Docket: A-214-08 Citation: 2009 FCA 101 Present: BETWEEN: HOLY ALPHA AND OMEGA CHURCH OF TORONTO Applicant and ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA Respondent Dealt with in writing without appearance
More informationProceeds of Crime (Money Laundering) and Terrorist Financing Act (PCMLTFA)
March 8, 2012 Via email: fcs-scf@fin.gc.ca Leah Anderson Director, Financial Sector Division Department of Finance L Esplanade Laurier 20th Floor, East Tower 140 O Connor Street Ottawa, ON K1A 0G5 Dear
More informationCitation: Ayangma v. P.E.I. Human Rights Commission Date: PESCAD 20 Docket: AD-0863 Registry: Charlottetown
Citation: Ayangma v. P.E.I. Human Rights Commission Date: 20000619 2000 PESCAD 20 Docket: AD-0863 Registry: Charlottetown PROVINCE OF PRINCE EDWARD ISLAND IN THE SUPREME COURT - APPEAL DIVISION BETWEEN:
More informationAnnual Report to Parliament on the Privacy Act April 1, 2016 to March 31, Ship-source Oil Pollution Fund
Ship-source Oil Pollution Fund Annual Report to Parliament on the Privacy Act April 1, 216 to March 31, 217 Caisse d indemnisation des dommages dus à la pollution par les hydrocarbures causée par les navires
More informationORDER PO Appeal PA Peterborough Regional Health Centre. June 30, 2016
ORDER PO-3627 Appeal PA15-399 Peterborough Regional Health Centre June 30, 2016 Summary: The appellant, a journalist, sought records relating to the termination of the employment of several employees of
More informationPEMSEL CASE FOUNDATION LAUNCHED TO FOSTER CANADIAN CHARITY LAW
PEMSEL CASE FOUNDATION LAUNCHED TO FOSTER CANADIAN CHARITY LAW Peter Broder Abstract Canadian charity law has not developed with the clarity and certainty currently found in similar law in many other countries.
More informationIMMUNOVACCINE TECHNOLOGIES INC. and HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN. Heard at Halifax, Nova Scotia, on September 9, 2014.
Date: 20140911 Docket: A-171-13 Citation: 2014 FCA 196 CORAM: NADON J.A. TRUDEL J.A. BETWEEN: IMMUNOVACCINE TECHNOLOGIES INC. Appellant and HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN Respondent Heard at Halifax, Nova Scotia,
More informationThis publication is also available in electronic format at
Office of the Taxpayers Ombudsman 724-50 0 Connor Street Ottawa ON K1P 6L2 Tel: 613-946-2310 Toll-free: 1-866-586-3839 Fax: 613-941-6319 Toll-free fax: 1-866-586-3855 Minister of Public Works and Government
More informationMINISTER OF NATIONAL REVENUE. and ROBERT MCNALLY. Dealt with in writing without appearance of parties.
CORAM: NEAR J.A. DE MONTIGNY J.A. Date: 20151106 Docket: A-358-15 Citation: 2015 FCA 248 BETWEEN: MINISTER OF NATIONAL REVENUE and Appellant ROBERT MCNALLY Respondent Dealt with in writing without appearance
More informationHER MAJESTY THE QUEEN. and GENERAL ELECTRIC CAPITAL CANADA INC. Dealt with in writing without appearance of parties.
Federal Court of Appeal Cour d'appel fédérale Date: 20101101 Docket: A-1-10 Citation: 2010 FCA 290 CORAM: MAINVILLE J.A. BETWEEN: HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN Appellant and GENERAL ELECTRIC CAPITAL CANADA INC.
More information[Abstract prepared by the PCT Legal Division (PCT )] Case Name: Eli Lilly Canada Inc. v. Apotex Inc. Jurisdiction:
[Abstract prepared by the PCT Legal Division (PCT-2010-0005)] Case Name: Eli Lilly Canada Inc. v. Apotex Inc. Jurisdiction: Abstract: Canada Federal Court of Appeal The applicant sought to invalidate a
More informationCase Name: R. v. Serré. Between Her Majesty the Queen, and Diane Serré. [2011] O.J. No ONSC Court File No.
Page 1 Case Name: R. v. Serré Between Her Majesty the Queen, and Diane Serré [2011] O.J. No. 6414 2011 ONSC 3609 Court File No. 05-30105 Ontario Superior Court of Justice C.D. Aitken J. Heard: May 10,
More informationCHARITY LAW BULLETIN NO.14
CHARITY LAW BULLETIN NO.14 Barristers, Solicitors & Trade-mark Agents / Avocats et agents de marques de commerce Affiliated with Fasken Martineau DuMoulin LLP / Affilié avec Fasken Martineau DuMoulin S.E.N.C.R.L.,
More informationBetween Waycobah First Nation, Appellant, and Attorney General of Canada, Respondent. [2011] F.C.J. No FCA 191.
Page 1 4 of 23 DOCUMENTS Case Name: Waycobah First Nation v. Canada (Attorney General) Between Waycobah First Nation, Appellant, and Attorney General of Canada, Respondent [2011] F.C.J. No. 847 2011 FCA
More informationSubmission to the Commission of Inquiry into the Investigation of the Bombing of Air India Flight 182
Submission to the Commission of Inquiry into the Investigation of the Bombing of Air India Flight 182 CANADIAN BAR ASSOCIATION April 2007 865 Carling Avenue, Suite 500, Ottawa, Ontario K1S 5S8 Tel/Tél:
More informationONTARIO SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE DIVISIONAL COURT CHADWICK, HOWDEN AND CAPUTO JJ. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )
COURT FILE NO.: 631/01 and 671/2001 DATE: November 28, 2002 ONTARIO SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE DIVISIONAL COURT CHADWICK, HOWDEN AND CAPUTO JJ. B E T W E E N: ATTORNEY GENERAL OF ONTARIO COMMISSIONER, and
More informationC - 45: A Wake Up Call January 28, 2013
C - 45: A Wake Up Call January 28, 2013 We don't have time to take you by the hand and show you what is really going on. In short, the Cdn Gov/Crown et al are seeking to pit Canadians against Indigenous.
More informationannual report Respect Excellence Integrity Leadership
annual report 2016 2017 Respect Excellence Integrity Leadership Office of the Information Commissioner of Canada 30 Victoria Street Gatineau, QC K1A 1H3 Tel. (toll free): 1 800 267-0441 Fax: 819-994-1768
More informationEstimates. Amendment
Amendment Atlantic Canada Opportunity Agency: On February 22, 2013, the Prime-Minister announced changes to the Ministry. Effective immediately, the Minister of National Revenue is responsible for the
More informationCase Name: Dhillon v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration)
Page 1 Case Name: Dhillon v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) Charanjit Kaur Dhillon, appellant, and Minister of Citizenship and Immigration, respondent [2006] I.A.D.D. No. 837 [2006] D.S.A.I.
More informationFEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL NELL TOUSSAINT. and THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION
-] ~. _ BETWEEN: FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL NELL TOUSSANT and THE MNSTER OF CTZENSHP AND MMGRATON A-408-09 Appellant Respondent RESPONDENT'S WRTTEN REPRESENTATONS OPPOSNG THE MOTON TO NTERVENE BROUGHT BY
More informationThe Joint Committee on Taxation of The Canadian Bar Association and Chartered Professional Accountants of Canada
The Joint Committee on Taxation of The Canadian Bar Association and Chartered Professional Accountants of Canada Chartered Professional Accountants of Canada, 277 Wellington St. W., Toronto Ontario, M5V3H2
More informationSUPREME COURT OF CANADA
SUPREME COURT OF CANADA CITATION: Agraira v. Canada (Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness), 2013 SCC 36 DATE: 20130620 DOCKET: 34258 BETWEEN: Muhsen Ahmed Ramadan Agraira Appellant and Minister of
More informationConflict of Interest and Post-employment Code for Public Office Holders
Conflict of Interest and Post-employment Code for Public Office Holders December 2003 Copies available from the Office of the Ethics Counsellor Ottawa, Canada K1A 0C9 TABLE OF CONTENTS Message from the
More informationCHARITY LAW BULLETIN NO.28
CHARITY LAW BULLETIN NO.28 Barristers, Solicitors & Trade-mark Agents / Avocats et agents de marques de commerce Affiliated with Fasken Martineau DuMoulin LLP / Affilié avec Fasken Martineau DuMoulin S.E.N.C.R.L.,
More informationCHARITY LAW BULLETIN NO. 105
CHARITY LAW BULLETIN NO. 105 DECEMBER 19, 2006 Barristers, Solicitors & Trade-mark Agents / Avocats et agents de marques de commerce Affiliated with Fasken Martineau DuMoulin LLP / Affilié avec Fasken
More informationONTARIO LIMITED. and. Heard at Ottawa, Ontario, on September 25, Judgment delivered at Ottawa, Ontario, on October 15, 2012.
Federal Court of Appeal Cour d'appel fédérale Date: 20121015 Docket: A-359-11 Citation: 2012 FCA 259 CORAM: NOËL J.A. SHARLOW J.A. MAINVILLE J.A. BETWEEN: 1207192 ONTARIO LIMITED and Appellant HER MAJESTY
More informationCanada: Federal Court of Appeal reaffirms existence of common interest privilege outside a litigation context
20 March 2018 Global Tax Alert News from Americas Tax Center Canada: Federal Court of Appeal reaffirms existence of common interest privilege outside a litigation context EY Global Tax Alert Library The
More informationCOUNCILLORS GEORGINA JOHNNY, BRANDY JULES AND RONALD JULES. and ADAMS LAKE INDIAN BAND. Heard at Vancouver, British Columbia, on June 19, 2017.
Date: 20170705 Docket: A-42-17 Citation: 2017 FCA 146 CORAM: DAWSON J.A. WEBB J.A. RENNIE J.A. BETWEEN: COUNCILLORS GEORGINA JOHNNY, BRANDY JULES AND RONALD JULES Appellants and ADAMS LAKE INDIAN BAND
More informationCHARITY LAW BULLETIN NO. 167
CHARITY LAW BULLETIN NO. 167 Carters Professional Corporation / Société professionnelle Carters Barristers, Solicitors & Trade-mark Agents / Avocats et agents de marques de commerce MAY 29, 2009 Editor:
More informationCitizenship and Immigration Canada. Annual Report Access to Information Act Privacy Act
Citizenship and Immigration Canada Annual Report 2013 2014 Access to Information Act Privacy Act Building a stronger Canada: Citizenship and Immigration Canada (CIC) strengthens Canada s economic, social
More informationCooper et al. v. Farmer's Mutual Insurance Company [Indexed as: Cooper v. Farmer's Mutual Insurance Co.]
Page 1 Cooper et al. v. Farmer's Mutual Insurance Company [Indexed as: Cooper v. Farmer's Mutual Insurance Co.] 59 O.R. (3d) 417 [2002] O.J. No. 1949 Docket No. C37051 Court of Appeal for Ontario, Abella,
More informationPRIVACY CODE FOR THE PROTECTION OF PERSONAL INFORMATION
PRIVACY CODE FOR THE PROTECTION OF PERSONAL INFORMATION 2015 PRIVACY CODE FOR THE PROTECTION OF PERSONAL INFORMATION PREAMBLE The Bank and companies part of its group, including B2B Bank, have always thrived
More informationMotifs et décision - Reasons and Decision
Motifs et décision - Reasons and Decision N de dossier de la SAR/RAD File No.: MB3-03199 Huis clos/private Proceeding Appelant XXXXX XXXXXXXXXX Appellant Appel instruit à Montréal, Québec Appeal considered
More informationSUPREME COURT OF CANADA. and. Workers Compensation Appeal Tribunal and Workers Compensation Board of British Columbia Respondents.
SUPREME COURT OF CANADA CITATION: West Fraser Mills Ltd. v. British Columbia (Workers Compensation Appeal Tribunal), 2018 SCC 22 APPEAL HEARD: December 4, 2017 JUDGMENT RENDERED: May 18, 2018 DOCKET: 37423
More informationAPOTEX INC. and. ALLERGAN INC. AND ALLERGAN, INC. and THE MINISTER OF HEALTH. Heard at Toronto, Ontario, on May 26, 2015.
Date: 20150603 Docket: A-299-14 Citation: 2015 FCA 137 CORAM: WEBB J.A. BOIVIN J.A. BETWEEN: APOTEX INC. Appellant and ALLERGAN INC. AND ALLERGAN, INC. and THE MINISTER OF HEALTH Respondents Heard at Toronto,
More informationCED: An Overview of the Law
Customs and Excise Notes for I.2-1.7: Obligations upon Importation and Enforcement I.2.(a): Obligations upon Importation - General FN1. Customs Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. 1 (2nd Supp.), Pt. II (ss. 11-43.1).
More informationOffice of the Commissioner for Federal Judicial Affairs Canada
About FJA Home About the Reports Overview Advisory Committee Obtain Reports Subscribe to E-mail Distribution List Search Reports Simple Search Advanced Search Reports by Volume Date Neutral Citation Case
More informationESTATE OF A. GERARD BUOTE AND DAVID WHITE. and HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN ORDER AND REASONS
Date: 20140805 Docket: T-889-08 Citation: 2014 FC 773 Ottawa, Ontario, August 5, 2014 PRESENT: The Honourable Mr. Justice Barnes BETWEEN: ESTATE OF A. GERARD BUOTE AND DAVID WHITE Plaintiffs and HER MAJESTY
More informationTHE IMMIGRATION ACTS. Promulgated On 5 January 2016 On 19 January Before DEPUTY UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE HUTCHINSON. Between BN (ANONYMITY ORDER)
Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) Appeal Number: AA/06347/2015 THE IMMIGRATION ACTS Heard at Field House Decision and Reasons Promulgated On 5 January 2016 On 19 January 2016 Before DEPUTY
More informationLegal Aid Review. What We Heard: A Summary of Consultation Input. Version 1.1 (May 8, 2017)
Legal Aid Review What We Heard: A Summary of Consultation Input 2017 Version 1.1 (May 8, 2017) 1 INTRODUCTION The Government of Alberta s review of the province s legal aid program was announced in late
More informationOrder F16-27 BC PAVILION CORPORATION. Celia Francis Adjudicator. May 25, 2016
Order F16-27 BC PAVILION CORPORATION Celia Francis Adjudicator May 25, 2016 CanLII Cite: 2016 BCIPC 29 Quicklaw Cite: [2016] B.C.I.P.C.D. No. 29 Summary: A journalist requested the contract between the
More informationANTI-TERRORISM AND CHARITY LAW ALERT NO. 44
ANTI-TERRORISM AND CHARITY LAW ALERT NO. 44 OCTOBER 28, 2015 EDITOR: TERRANCE S. CARTER POLITICALLY EXPOSED PERSONS : SHOULD IT MATTER TO YOUR CHARITY? By Terrance S. Carter, Nancy E. Claridge, Sean S.
More information1 of 2 DOCUMENTS. BETWEEN: JULIE PIGEON, Appellant, and HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN, Respondent. Docket: (IT)I TAX COURT OF CANADA
Page 1 1 of 2 DOCUMENTS BETWEEN: JULIE PIGEON, Appellant, and HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN, Respondent. Docket: 2007-573(IT)I TAX COURT OF CANADA 2010 TCC 643; 2010 Can. Tax Ct. LEXIS 908 December 16, 2010 [*1]
More informationLand Owner Transparency Act White Paper: Draft Legislation with Annotations
Land Owner Transparency Act White Paper: Draft Legislation with Annotations June 2018 Foreword from the Honourable Carole James, Minister of Finance and Deputy Premier In Budget 2018, the B.C. government
More informationINTRODUCTION PATRICIA SAWCHUK
POLICY INTRODUCTION PATRICIA SAWCHUK "Outstanding Business - A Native Claims Policy" was released on May 13, 1982 by the Honourable John Munro, Minister of Indian and Northern Affairs. This policy statement
More informationANTI-TERRORISM AND CHARITY LAW BULLETIN NO. 40
ANTI-TERRORISM AND CHARITY LAW BULLETIN NO. 40 JUNE 25, 2015 EDITOR: TERRANCE S. CARTER HOUSE OF COMMONS FINANCE COMMITTEE TABLES REPORT ON TERRORIST FINANCING By Terrance S. Carter, Nancy E. Claridge
More informationBETWEEN AWARD AND IN THE MATTER OF THE ARBITRATION ACT AND IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATOR CO-OPERATORS GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY
IN THE MATTER OF THE INSURANCE ACT R.SO. 1990 C.18 S.275 AND REGULATION 6664 OF R.R.O. 1990 S.9 AND IN THE MATTER OF THE ARBITRATION ACT 1991 SC. 1991 C.17 AND IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATOR BETWEEN CO-OPERATORS
More informationand MINISTER OF NATIONAL REVENUE (CANADA REVENUE AGENCY) And Dealt with in writing without appearance of parties.
Federal Court of Appeal Cour d'appel fédérale CORAM: DAWSON J.A. TRUDEL J.A. Date: 20110307 Dockets: A-36-11 A-37-11 Citation: 2011 FCA 71 BETWEEN: OPERATION SAVE CANADA TEENAGERS and MINISTER OF NATIONAL
More informationCanadian Ownership and Control
Issue 2 August 2007 Spectrum Management and Telecommunications Client Procedures Circular Canadian Ownership and Control Note: Appendix A was corrected in February 2010 to reflect the definition of radiocommunication
More informationANTI-MONEY LAUNDERING AND ANTI-TERRORIST FINANCING CONSULTATION RELEASED
ANTI-TERRORISM & CHARITY LAW ALERT NO. 27 JANUARY 24, 2012 EDITOR: TERRANCE S. CARTER ANTI-MONEY LAUNDERING AND ANTI-TERRORIST FINANCING CONSULTATION RELEASED By Terrance S. Carter and Nancy E. Claridge
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEAL [1] HONOURABLE ATTORNEY-GENERAL [2] THE HONOURABLE EDZEL THOMAS [3] MINISTER OF LABOUR
1 GRENADA IN THE COURT OF APPEAL CIVIL APPEAL NO.8 1995 BETWEEN: LIBERTY CLUB LIMITED v Appellant [1] HONOURABLE ATTORNEY-GENERAL [2] THE HONOURABLE EDZEL THOMAS [3] MINISTER OF LABOUR Before: The Hon.
More informationHeard at Vancouver, British Columbia, on May 4, Judgment delivered at Ottawa, Ontario, on June 7, 2011.
Date: 20110607 Docket: A-75-10 Citation: 2011 FCA 192 CORAM: NADON J.A. LAYDEN-STEVENSON J.A. MAINVILLE J.A. BETWEEN: NEWS TO YOU CANADA Appellant and MINISTER OF NATIONAL REVENUE Respondent Heard at Vancouver,
More informationTHE SIX-MINUTE Real Estate Lawyer 2017
TAB 2 THE SIX-MINUTE Real Estate Lawyer 2017 Proceeds of Crime (Money Laundering) and Terrorist Financing Act and Related Record-Keeping Candace Cooper Daoust Vukovich LLP November 21, 2017 Presented
More informationDecision P12-02 (in reference to Order P11-02) ECONOMICAL MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY. Elizabeth Denham, Information & Privacy Commissioner
Decision P12-02 (in reference to Order P11-02) ECONOMICAL MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY Elizabeth Denham, Information & Privacy Commissioner September 27, 2012 Quicklaw Cite: [2012] B.C.I.P.C.D. No. 19 CanLII
More informationNOTICE OF ADOPTION COMMISSION LOCAL RULE MB-001 MORTGAGE BROKERS LICENSING AND ONGOING OBLIGATIONS AND
NOTICE OF ADOPTION COMMISSION LOCAL RULE MB-001 MORTGAGE BROKERS LICENSING AND ONGOING OBLIGATIONS AND COMMISSION LOCAL RULE MB-002 MORTGAGE BROKERS FEES Introduction On 25 May 2015, the Financial and
More informationPRE-TRIAL CHAMBER I. Judge Péter Kovács, Presiding Judge Judge Marc Perrin de Brichambaut Judge Reine Adélaïde Sophie Alapini-Gansou
ICC-RoC46(3)-01/18-12 07-06-2018 1/5 NM PT Original: English No. ICC-RoC46(3)-01/18 Date: 7 June 2018 PRE-TRIAL CHAMBER I Before: Judge Péter Kovács, Presiding Judge Judge Marc Perrin de Brichambaut Judge
More informationOffice of the Auditor General of Canada Estimates. Report on Plans and Priorities. Approved
Office of the Auditor General of Canada 2007 08 Estimates Report on Plans and Priorities Approved Sheila Fraser, FCA Auditor General of Canada Honourable Jim Flaherty, P.C., MP Minister of Finance For
More informationIRS SUMMONS ISSUED AT CANADA'S REQUEST ENFORCEABLE EVEN THOUGH INFORMATION WOULD ALSO BE USED FOR CRIMINAL PROSECUTION PURPOSES IN CANADA
Setright: Recent Developments IRS SUMMONS ISSUED AT CANADA'S REQUEST ENFORCEABLE EVEN THOUGH INFORMATION WOULD ALSO BE USED FOR CRIMINAL PROSECUTION PURPOSES IN CANADA I. INTRODUCTION The United States-Canada
More informationSSC Inquiry into the Use of External Security Consultants by Government Agencies
SSC Inquiry into the Use of External Security Consultants by Government Agencies STATE SERVICES COMMISSIONER S RESPONSE In March 2018 I launched an Inquiry under the State Sector Act into the Use of External
More informationUNANIMOUS SHAREHOLDER AGREEMENTS AND CCPC STATUS
UNANIMOUS SHAREHOLDER AGREEMENTS AND CCPC STATUS Paul Lamarre* Published in Taxation Law, Vol. 21, No. 1, Ontario Bar Association Taxation Law Section Newsletter, October 2010 A corporation that qualifies
More informationSUPPLEMENTARY ESTIMATES (C) Supplementary Estimates (C),
SUPPLEMENTARY ESTIMATES (C) Supplementary (C), 2017 18 For the Fiscal year ending March 31, 2018 Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada, as represented by the President of the Treasury Board, 2018 This
More informationCOURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO
Court File No. C41105 COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO B E T W E E N : ETHEL AHENAKEW, ALBERT BELLEMARE, C. HANSON DOWELL, MARIE GATLEY, JEAN GLOVER, HEWARD GRAFFTEY, AIRACA HAVER, LELANND HAVER, ROBERT HESS,
More informationLIPSETT CARTAGE LTD. and
Date: 20180601 Docket: T-170-17 Citation: 2018 FC 572 Ottawa, Ontario, June 1, 2018 PRESENT: The Honourable Mr. Justice Favel BETWEEN: LIPSETT CARTAGE LTD. Applicant and DEAN WILLIAM JACOB ELIAS AND T.F.
More informationRequest for Hon John Banks statement to the Police
Request for Hon John Banks statement to the Police Ombudsman s opinion Legislation: Official Information Act 1982, ss 6(c), 9(2)(a), 9(2)(ba)(ii) (see Appendix for full text) Requester: The New Zealand
More informationSTATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, Applicant
CITATION: State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company v. TD Home & Auto Insurance Company, 2016 ONSC 6229 COURT FILE NO.: CV-16-555100 DATE: 20161222 SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE ONTARIO RE: STATE FARM
More informationCase Name: Paquette v. TeraGo Networks Inc. Between Trevor Paquette, Plaintiff (Appellant), and TeraGo Networks Inc., Defendant (Respondent)
Page 1 Case Name: Paquette v. TeraGo Networks Inc. Between Trevor Paquette, Plaintiff (Appellant), and TeraGo Networks Inc., Defendant (Respondent) [2016] O.J. No. 4222 2016 ONCA 618 269 A.C.W.S. (3d)
More informationLANDMARK CASE BCE INC. V DEBENTUREHOLDERS
BCE INC. V. 1976 DEBENTUREHOLDERS CURRICULUM LINKS: Canadian and International Law, Grade 12, University Preparation (CLN4U) Understanding Canadian Law, Grade 11, University/College Preparation (CLU3M)
More informationSUPPLEMENTARY ESTIMATES (A) Supplementary Estimates (A),
SUPPLEMENTARY ESTIMATES (A) Supplementary (A), 2016 17 For the Fiscal year ending March 31, 2017 Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada, as represented by the President of the Treasury Board, 2017 This
More informationECHELON GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY. - and - DECISION ON A PRELIMINARY ISSUE
IN THE MATTER OF SECTION 275 OF THE INSURANCE ACT, R.S.O. 1990, AND ONTARIO REGULATION 664 AND IN THE MATTER OF THE ARBITRATION ACT, S.O. 1991, c.17 AND IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION BETWEEN: ECHELON
More information