Decisions

View Sectional Index

Similar to Orders, the OIPC can issue legally binding Decisions. While Orders address complaints and requests for review received by the OIPC, Decisions address the following specific topics:

  • A decision on preliminary issues in a specific dispute, or to confirm whether a matter is within the OIPC's jurisdiction.
  • An application by a public body to collect personal information from a source other than the individual.
  • An application by a public body to disregard access requests on the grounds of their repetitious or systematic nature, which unreasonably interfere with the operations of the public body, and/or the access requests are of a frivolous or vexatious nature.
  • A request that the Commissioner exercise his/her discretion not to proceed with an inquiry in relation to a complaint or request for review (FIPPA only).

How to use this table: Decisions can be sorted by date, number and title -- click on the column heading to sort by that category. Use the drop-down menu to filter by legislation type or year. Leading Cases contain extensive discussion of a specific section of the Act.

Leading Case
Judicial Review
Summary
F25-02 Jul 11, 2025 City of Vancouver Section 42
An applicant requested to participate in an OIPC inquiry without providing their name to the OIPC or the other parties to the inquiry. In an initial decision, the OIPC granted the applicant’s request. A third party to the inquiry requested that the OIPC review the initial decision. The adjudicator assigned to conduct the review set the initial decision aside and invited the parties to make fresh submissions in respect of the applicant’s anonymity request. Based on those submissions, the adjudicator decided that the applicant was not permitted to participate in the inquiry while remaining anonymous from the OIPC or the other parties. The adjudicator directed the applicant to provide their first and last name to the OIPC and the other parties to the inquiry if they wished for the inquiry to proceed.An applicant requested to participate in an OIPC inquiry without providing their name to the OIPC or the other parties to the inquiry. In an initial decision, the OIPC granted the applicant’s request. A third party to the inquiry requested that the OIPC review the initial decision. The adjudicator assigned to conduct the review set the initial decision aside and invited the parties to make fresh submissions in respect of the applicant’s anonymity request. Based on those submissions, the adjudicator decided that the applicant was not permitted to participate in the inquiry while remaining anonymous from the OIPC or the other parties. The adjudicator directed the applicant to provide their first and last name to the OIPC and the other parties to the inquiry if they wished for the inquiry to proceed.
F25-01 May 7, 2025 City of Vancouver Preliminary / Jurisdictional
This decision arises out of a court-ordered partial reconsideration of Order F21-65, which dealt with an applicant’s access request involving the City of Vancouver (City) and Airbnb Ireland UC (Airbnb). The records in Order F21-65 were related to short-term rental (STR) operators who provided STR accommodations within the City for a specific timeframe, including the STR operators who had listed on Airbnb’s online platform at that time. Airbnb filed a petition for a judicial review of Order F21-65. At the judicial review, Airbnb and the City argued for the first time that the OIPC should have provided notice under s. 54(b) to the approximately 20,000 STR operators and given them an opportunity to participate in the inquiry. The BC Supreme Court quashed Order F21-65 and directed the OIPC to reconsider Order F21-65 after first providing notice to the STR operators. The OIPC appealed. The BC Court of Appeal allowed the OIPC’s appeal to the limited extent of setting aside the requirement that the OIPC must provide notice to the STR operators under s. 54(b). The Court of Appeal held that it is for the OIPC at first instance to determine and give reasons on whether it is appropriate to provide notice to the STR operators and allow them to participate in the reconsideration of Order F21-65. The OIPC adjudicator concluded the OIPC is not required to, and will not, issue notice under s. 54(b) to the STR operators. This decision arises out of a court-ordered partial reconsideration of Order F21-65, which dealt with an applicant’s access request involving the City of Vancouver (City) and Airbnb Ireland UC (Airbnb). The records in Order F21-65 were related to short-term rental (STR) operators who provided STR accommodations within the City for a specific timeframe, including the STR operators who had listed on Airbnb’s online platform at that time. Airbnb filed a petition for a judicial review of Order F21-65. At the judicial review, Airbnb and the City argued for the first time that the OIPC should have provided notice under s. 54(b) to the approximately 20,000 STR operators and given them an opportunity to participate in the inquiry. The BC Supreme Court quashed Order F21-65 and directed the OIPC to reconsider Order F21-65 after first providing notice to the STR operators. The OIPC appealed. The BC Court of Appeal allowed the OIPC’s appeal to the limited extent of setting aside the requirement that the OIPC must provide notice to the STR operators under s. 54(b). The Court of Appeal held that it is for the OIPC at first instance to determine and give reasons on whether it is appropriate to provide notice to the STR operators and allow them to participate in the reconsideration of Order F21-65. The OIPC adjudicator concluded the OIPC is not required to, and will not, issue notice under s. 54(b) to the STR operators.
Auth. (s. 42) F24-97285 Jun 11, 2024 Merit Commissioner: Authorization for indirect collection of personal information Section 42
Under section 42(1)(i) of the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (FIPPA), the Privacy Commissioner authorizes the Merit Commissioner to collect personal information from sources other than the individual the information is about for the purposes of performing a monitoring function following a recommendation from the Office of the BC Ombudsperson (Ombudsperson) to the BC Public Service Agency (PSA) under the Public Interest Disclosure Act (PIDA). The recommendation results from a PIDA investigation completed by the Ombudsperson into internal hiring practices involving the PSA.Under section 42(1)(i) of the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (FIPPA), the Privacy Commissioner authorizes the Merit Commissioner to collect personal information from sources other than the individual the information is about for the purposes of performing a monitoring function following a recommendation from the Office of the BC Ombudsperson (Ombudsperson) to the BC Public Service Agency (PSA) under the Public Interest Disclosure Act (PIDA). The recommendation results from a PIDA investigation completed by the Ombudsperson into internal hiring practices involving the PSA.
Auth. (s. 42) F24-95657 29 Jan 29, 2024 Ministry of Public Safety and Solicitor General – Intimate Images Protection Service: Authorization for indirect collection of personal information Section 42
Under section 42(1)(i) of the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (FIPPA), the Commissioner authorizes the Ministry of Public Safety and Solicitor General (Ministry) to collect personal information from sources other than the individual the information is about for the purposes of providing support services to victims of non-consensual disclosure of intimate images who seek support from the Ministry after being threatened with non- consensual disclosure of an intimate image, or whose intimate image has been distributed without consent, as defined by the Intimate Images Protection Act (IIPA).Under section 42(1)(i) of the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (FIPPA), the Commissioner authorizes the Ministry of Public Safety and Solicitor General (Ministry) to collect personal information from sources other than the individual the information is about for the purposes of providing support services to victims of non-consensual disclosure of intimate images who seek support from the Ministry after being threatened with non- consensual disclosure of an intimate image, or whose intimate image has been distributed without consent, as defined by the Intimate Images Protection Act (IIPA).
Auth (s. 42) F21-85573 Apr 22, 2021 Ministry of Health: Medical Assistance in Dying (MAID) - Authorization for Indirect Collection of Personal Information Section 42
Under section 42(1)(i) of the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (FIPPA), the Commissioner authorizes the Deputy Minister of Health to collect personal information from sources other than the individual the information is about, such as witnesses to the written request, medical practitioners, nurse practitioners, and pharmacists, with respect to the Ministry’s role in facilitating medical assistance in dying (MAID) under the exception set out in s. 241.1 of the Criminal Code and associated Regulations.Under section 42(1)(i) of the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (FIPPA), the Commissioner authorizes the Deputy Minister of Health to collect personal information from sources other than the individual the information is about, such as witnesses to the written request, medical practitioners, nurse practitioners, and pharmacists, with respect to the Ministry’s role in facilitating medical assistance in dying (MAID) under the exception set out in s. 241.1 of the Criminal Code and associated Regulations.
Auth (s. 42) F20-82281 Oct 23, 2020 Ministry of Health - Authorization for Indirect Collection of Personal Information Section 42
Under section 42(1)(i) of the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (FIPPA), the Commissioner authorizes the Ministry of Health to indirectly collect personal information about individuals seeking or receiving medial assistance in dying (MAID), and about witnesses to their written request, from medical practitioners, nurse practitioners, and pharmacists. This authorization extends the timeline of the earlier authorization made on this matter (October 31, 2018) by one year. With the exception of this extension, all conditions and limitations set out in the earlier authorization remain in place. For reference, the earlier authorization is appended to this extended authorization.Under section 42(1)(i) of the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (FIPPA), the Commissioner authorizes the Ministry of Health to indirectly collect personal information about individuals seeking or receiving medial assistance in dying (MAID), and about witnesses to their written request, from medical practitioners, nurse practitioners, and pharmacists. This authorization extends the timeline of the earlier authorization made on this matter (October 31, 2018) by one year. With the exception of this extension, all conditions and limitations set out in the earlier authorization remain in place. For reference, the earlier authorization is appended to this extended authorization.
Auth (s. 42) F19-78741 Apr 11, 2019 Ministry of Public Safety and Solicitor General - Authorization for indirect collection Section 42
Under s. 42(1)(i) of the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (FIPPA), the Commissioner authorizes the Ministry of Public Safety and Solicitor General (the Ministry) to indirectly collect the names, relationships, genders, ages, and additional descriptors of family or household members from a family or household or household representative when they register with Emergency Management BC’s (EMBC) Emergency Support Services (ESS). In addition, the Ministry may collect the family or household or household’s permanent address, post-disaster address, information about how the disaster has affected the family or household, whether the family or household has insurance, family and friend support, any services, medical or dietary needs, what the family or household’s long-term recovery plan is, whether the family or household requires a follow-up, and any cross-referenced ESS file numbers for the purpose of assessing need and allocating resources.Under s. 42(1)(i) of the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (FIPPA), the Commissioner authorizes the Ministry of Public Safety and Solicitor General (the Ministry) to indirectly collect the names, relationships, genders, ages, and additional descriptors of family or household members from a family or household or household representative when they register with Emergency Management BC’s (EMBC) Emergency Support Services (ESS). In addition, the Ministry may collect the family or household or household’s permanent address, post-disaster address, information about how the disaster has affected the family or household, whether the family or household has insurance, family and friend support, any services, medical or dietary needs, what the family or household’s long-term recovery plan is, whether the family or household requires a follow-up, and any cross-referenced ESS file numbers for the purpose of assessing need and allocating resources.
Auth (s. 42) F17-69673 Mar 28, 2019 Ministry of Health - Authorization for Indirect Collection of Personal Information Section 42
Under s. 42(1)(i) of the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (FIPPA), the Commissioner authorizes the Ministry of Health to indirectly collect the name, date of birth, gender, contact information, and personal health number of a person from an individual who has a close relationship with, or a responsibility for the health and well-being of, that person for the purpose of registering that person on a primary care waitlist established and maintained by HealthLink BC.Under s. 42(1)(i) of the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (FIPPA), the Commissioner authorizes the Ministry of Health to indirectly collect the name, date of birth, gender, contact information, and personal health number of a person from an individual who has a close relationship with, or a responsibility for the health and well-being of, that person for the purpose of registering that person on a primary care waitlist established and maintained by HealthLink BC.
Auth. (s. 42) F18-76809 Nov 28, 2018 Ministry of Forests, Lands, Natural Resource Operations & Rural Development Section 42
Under s. 42(1)(i) of the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (FIPPA), the Commissioner grants authorization for the Ministry of Forests, Lands, Natural Resource Operations and Rural Development to indirectly collect the personal information of holders of water licences, use and change approvals, and permits as defined under the Water Sustainability Act (WSA), for the purpose of administering the province’s water rights system.Under s. 42(1)(i) of the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (FIPPA), the Commissioner grants authorization for the Ministry of Forests, Lands, Natural Resource Operations and Rural Development to indirectly collect the personal information of holders of water licences, use and change approvals, and permits as defined under the Water Sustainability Act (WSA), for the purpose of administering the province’s water rights system.
Auth. (s. 42) F18-76615 Oct 31, 2018 Ministry of Health - Authorization for Indirect Collection of Personal Information Section 42
The Ministry of Health requested authorization from the Information and Privacy Commissioner to indirectly collect personal information from health care providers, assessors, and consultants for the purposes of monitoring and overseeing the provision of medical assistance in dying (MAID) in British Columbia. The Ministry of Health requested authorization from the Information and Privacy Commissioner to indirectly collect personal information from health care providers, assessors, and consultants for the purposes of monitoring and overseeing the provision of medical assistance in dying (MAID) in British Columbia.
Auth. (s. 42) F17-71827 Mar 28, 2018 Ministry of Health - Authorization for Indirect Collection of Personal Information Section 42
Under section 42(1)(i) of the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (FIPPA), the Acting Commissioner authorizes the Ministry of Health to indirectly collect personal information about individuals seeking or receiving medical assistance in dying, and about witnesses to their written requests, from medical practitioners, nurse practitioners, and pharmacists, in accordance with its obligations as a designated recipient under the federal regulations made by the federal Minister of Health pursuant to s. 241.31 (3) of the Criminal Code on the conditions set out below.Under section 42(1)(i) of the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (FIPPA), the Acting Commissioner authorizes the Ministry of Health to indirectly collect personal information about individuals seeking or receiving medical assistance in dying, and about witnesses to their written requests, from medical practitioners, nurse practitioners, and pharmacists, in accordance with its obligations as a designated recipient under the federal regulations made by the federal Minister of Health pursuant to s. 241.31 (3) of the Criminal Code on the conditions set out below.
Auth. (s. 42) F17-71253 Sep 21, 2017 Ministry of Public Safety and Solicitor General - Authorization for Indirect Collection of Personal Information Section 42
Under section 42(1)(i) of the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (FIPPA), the Acting Commissioner authorizes the Ministry of Public Safety and Solicitor General to indirectly collect personal information about missing and murdered Indigenous women and girls in two circumstances.Under section 42(1)(i) of the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (FIPPA), the Acting Commissioner authorizes the Ministry of Public Safety and Solicitor General to indirectly collect personal information about missing and murdered Indigenous women and girls in two circumstances.
Auth. (s. 42) F17-70422 Jun 16, 2017 Ministry of Finance - Authorization for Indirect Collection of Personal Information Section 42
Under s. 42(1)(i) of the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (FIPPA), the Commissioner authorizes the Ministry of Finance (Ministry) to indirectly collect the email and/or mailing addresses of approximately 74 individuals for the purpose of contacting those individuals as recommended in the Ombudsperson’s April 6, 2017 report: Misfire: The 2012 Ministry of Health Employment Terminations and Related Matters (Misfire Report).Under s. 42(1)(i) of the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (FIPPA), the Commissioner authorizes the Ministry of Finance (Ministry) to indirectly collect the email and/or mailing addresses of approximately 74 individuals for the purpose of contacting those individuals as recommended in the Ombudsperson’s April 6, 2017 report: Misfire: The 2012 Ministry of Health Employment Terminations and Related Matters (Misfire Report).
(Auth.) s. 42 F15-62711 Sep 16, 2015 Ministry of International Trade and Responsible for Asia Pacific Strategy and Multiculturalism Section 42
Unders. 42(1)(i) of the Freedom of Information and Protection of PrivacyAct (“FIPPA”), the Commissioner authorizes the Ministry of International Trade & Responsible for Asia Pacific Strategy & Multiculturalism to indirectly collect personal information relating to deceased Chinese British Columbians whose personal information is to be included in the Celebration Book.Unders. 42(1)(i) of the Freedom of Information and Protection of PrivacyAct (“FIPPA”), the Commissioner authorizes the Ministry of International Trade & Responsible for Asia Pacific Strategy & Multiculturalism to indirectly collect personal information relating to deceased Chinese British Columbians whose personal information is to be included in the Celebration Book.
Auth. (s. 42) F13-55671 Dec 31, 2013 Provincial Health Services Authority Section 42
Under s. 42(1)(i) of the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (“FIPPA”), I authorize the Provincial Health Services Authority (“PHSA”) to indirectly collect the personal information of health sciences students participating in the Health Sciences Placement Network (“HSPnet”) program for a one-time transfer of the HSPnet database when the PHSA acquires HSPnet from the British Columbia Academic Health Council (“BCAHC”) and for a three month period afterward when the PHSA continues the operation of HSPnet.Under s. 42(1)(i) of the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (“FIPPA”), I authorize the Provincial Health Services Authority (“PHSA”) to indirectly collect the personal information of health sciences students participating in the Health Sciences Placement Network (“HSPnet”) program for a one-time transfer of the HSPnet database when the PHSA acquires HSPnet from the British Columbia Academic Health Council (“BCAHC”) and for a three month period afterward when the PHSA continues the operation of HSPnet.
F13-01 May 30, 2013 Vancouver Coastal Health Authority Section 56
Vancouver Coastal Health Authority asked that the OIPC not hold an inquiry into its decision to withhold information in response to an applicant’s request. The adjudicator granted VCHA’s request because it was plain and obvious that FIPPA did not apply to the information requested and therefore the information could be withheld. Vancouver Coastal Health Authority asked that the OIPC not hold an inquiry into its decision to withhold information in response to an applicant’s request. The adjudicator granted VCHA’s request because it was plain and obvious that FIPPA did not apply to the information requested and therefore the information could be withheld.
F12-01 Apr 18, 2012 City of Rossland Section 43
The City requested authorization to disregard four outstanding requests from the client, as well as other relief. The adjudicator found that the requests were not repetitious or systematic and dismissed the application of the City.The City requested authorization to disregard four outstanding requests from the client, as well as other relief. The adjudicator found that the requests were not repetitious or systematic and dismissed the application of the City.
Auth F12-48368 Mar 30, 2012 Ministry of Health Section 42
Under s. 42(1 )(i) of the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act ("FIPPA"), the Commissioner authorizes the BC Transplant Society, Health Authorities, Vancouver General Hospital, St Paul's Hospital, the BC Children's Hospital and the BC Renal Agency to indirectly collect personal information relating to donors and recipients located outside of British Columbia for the purposes of organ and tissue donation and transplantation from two national donor registries operated by Canadian Blood Services (the National Organ Waitlist and the Highly Sensitized Kidney Patients registry).Under s. 42(1 )(i) of the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act ("FIPPA"), the Commissioner authorizes the BC Transplant Society, Health Authorities, Vancouver General Hospital, St Paul's Hospital, the BC Children's Hospital and the BC Renal Agency to indirectly collect personal information relating to donors and recipients located outside of British Columbia for the purposes of organ and tissue donation and transplantation from two national donor registries operated by Canadian Blood Services (the National Organ Waitlist and the Highly Sensitized Kidney Patients registry).
F11-04 Nov 23, 2011 College of Physicians and Surgeons of British Columbia Section 43
The College requested relief from any future requests of the physician. There are no requests currently open. The physician had already received all of his own personal information. The College does not require relief under s. 43 of FIPPA to be able to refuse to provide additional copies of records it had already provided to him. The adjudicator declined to give the College the formal authority under s. 43 to disregard future requests.The College requested relief from any future requests of the physician. There are no requests currently open. The physician had already received all of his own personal information. The College does not require relief under s. 43 of FIPPA to be able to refuse to provide additional copies of records it had already provided to him. The adjudicator declined to give the College the formal authority under s. 43 to disregard future requests.
F11-03 Nov 17, 2011 Ministry of Social Development Section 43
The Ministry requested authorization to disregard two outstanding requests from the client, as well as other relief. The Ministry is authorized to disregard the requests on the grounds that they are repetitious and unreasonably interfere with the Ministry’s operations. The Ministry is further authorized, for five years from the date of this decision, to disregard any future requests from the client in excess of one open request at a time.The Ministry requested authorization to disregard two outstanding requests from the client, as well as other relief. The Ministry is authorized to disregard the requests on the grounds that they are repetitious and unreasonably interfere with the Ministry’s operations. The Ministry is further authorized, for five years from the date of this decision, to disregard any future requests from the client in excess of one open request at a time.
F11-02 May 12, 2011 Ministry of Finance Section 56
The Ministry asked, under s. 56, that an inquiry not be held respecting the Ministry’s decision to sever information from transcripts derived from certain interview notes. The Ministry argued the matter was moot because the applicant had already obtained an unsevered version of the records through a BC Human Rights Tribunal proceeding. In the alternative, the Ministry submitted it was plain and obvious that s. 22 of FIPPA applied to the records. The Ministry’s request was denied. The matter was not moot because the disclosure of the unsevered records through the BC Human Rights Tribunal process was restricted to their use in that proceeding only. The applicant was requesting the records for use in another proceeding. Further, it was not plain and obvious that s. 22 applied to the information in dispute.The Ministry asked, under s. 56, that an inquiry not be held respecting the Ministry’s decision to sever information from transcripts derived from certain interview notes. The Ministry argued the matter was moot because the applicant had already obtained an unsevered version of the records through a BC Human Rights Tribunal proceeding. In the alternative, the Ministry submitted it was plain and obvious that s. 22 of FIPPA applied to the records. The Ministry’s request was denied. The matter was not moot because the disclosure of the unsevered records through the BC Human Rights Tribunal process was restricted to their use in that proceeding only. The applicant was requesting the records for use in another proceeding. Further, it was not plain and obvious that s. 22 applied to the information in dispute.
F11-01 Mar 15, 2011 Law Society of British Columbia Section 56
The applicant requested the Law Society provide him certain correspondence between Davis LLP and third parties, that were copied to the Law Society and that related to him. The Law Society disclosed some records but withheld others claiming they were subject to solicitor-client privilege. The Law Society submitted that it was plain and obvious that s. 14 of FIPPA applied and requested that discretion be exercised to not hold an inquiry in this matter. The adjudicator exercised his discretion to grant the Law Society’s request, finding that it was plain and obvious that solicitor-client privilege applied and the applicant had not made any cogent argument to the contrary. The applicant requested the Law Society provide him certain correspondence between Davis LLP and third parties, that were copied to the Law Society and that related to him. The Law Society disclosed some records but withheld others claiming they were subject to solicitor-client privilege. The Law Society submitted that it was plain and obvious that s. 14 of FIPPA applied and requested that discretion be exercised to not hold an inquiry in this matter. The adjudicator exercised his discretion to grant the Law Society’s request, finding that it was plain and obvious that solicitor-client privilege applied and the applicant had not made any cogent argument to the contrary.
F10-15 Dec 2, 2010 Simon Fraser University Section 56
The respondent requested access to emails concerning a room in an SFU residence. SFU provided access to the requested records, but severed portions under s. 13 of FIPPA as advice or recommendations. The respondent requested a review of SFU’s s. 13 decision and also argued that s. 25 (public interest override) applied. SFU asked that an inquiry not be held as s. 13 clearly applies. The adjudicator concluded that it is plain and obvious that the withheld portions of the records are advice or recommendations and it is also not necessary to consider whether s. 25 applies. Adjudicator granted Simon Fraser University’s request that this matter not proceed to inquiry.The respondent requested access to emails concerning a room in an SFU residence. SFU provided access to the requested records, but severed portions under s. 13 of FIPPA as advice or recommendations. The respondent requested a review of SFU’s s. 13 decision and also argued that s. 25 (public interest override) applied. SFU asked that an inquiry not be held as s. 13 clearly applies. The adjudicator concluded that it is plain and obvious that the withheld portions of the records are advice or recommendations and it is also not necessary to consider whether s. 25 applies. Adjudicator granted Simon Fraser University’s request that this matter not proceed to inquiry.
F10-14 Nov 4, 2010 Regional District of Central Okanagan Section 56
Adjudicator granted the Regional District of Central Okanagan's request that this matter not proceed to inquiry.Adjudicator granted the Regional District of Central Okanagan's request that this matter not proceed to inquiry.
F10-13 Nov 3, 2010 Abbotsford Police Department Section 56
Adjudicator denied the Abbotsford Police Department's request that this matter not proceed to inquiry.Adjudicator denied the Abbotsford Police Department's request that this matter not proceed to inquiry.
F10-12 Oct 21, 2010 Ministry of Attorney General Section 56
Adjudicator granted the Ministry of Attorney General's request that this matter not proceed to inquiry. Adjudicator granted the Ministry of Attorney General's request that this matter not proceed to inquiry.
F10-11 Oct 14, 2010 Ministry of Labour Section 43
Three of the respondent?s requests are systematic and would unreasonably interfere with the Ministries? operations. The fourth is vexatious. The Ministry is authorized to disregard the outstanding requests and is also entitled to other relief.Three of the respondent?s requests are systematic and would unreasonably interfere with the Ministries? operations. The fourth is vexatious. The Ministry is authorized to disregard the outstanding requests and is also entitled to other relief.
F10-10 Oct 7, 2010 BC Housing Management Commission Section 56 Adjudicator granted BC Housing’s request that this matter not proceed to inquiry.
F10-09 Sep 29, 2010 Provincial Health Services Authority and Children's and Women's Health Centre of British Columbia Section 43
The respondent‘s request of March 2009 for records regarding his ongoing dispute with the PHSA, except with respect to solicitor-client communications, is not frivolous or vexatious or systematic or repetitious. There are options available to the PHSA under FIPPA for reducing the administrative burden of responding to this portion of the request. The PHSA is authorized to disregard the portion of the request regarding solicitor-client communications and any future requests for such records for two years.The respondent‘s request of March 2009 for records regarding his ongoing dispute with the PHSA, except with respect to solicitor-client communications, is not frivolous or vexatious or systematic or repetitious. There are options available to the PHSA under FIPPA for reducing the administrative burden of responding to this portion of the request. The PHSA is authorized to disregard the portion of the request regarding solicitor-client communications and any future requests for such records for two years.
F10-08 Aug 16, 2010 Ministry of Education Preliminary / Jurisdictional
Senior Adjudicator finds that the Commissioner has the authority to investigate the Ministry of Education’s exercise of discretion in deciding not to renew a research agreement.Senior Adjudicator finds that the Commissioner has the authority to investigate the Ministry of Education’s exercise of discretion in deciding not to renew a research agreement.
F10-07 Jul 29, 2010 British Columbia Lottery Corporation Section 56
Adjudicator denied BCLC’s request that an inquiry not proceed on grounds of abuse of process under FIPPA.Adjudicator denied BCLC’s request that an inquiry not proceed on grounds of abuse of process under FIPPA.
F10-06 Jun 7, 2010 Vancouver Coastal Health Authority Section 56
Senior Adjudicator's decision to grant the Public Body's request that an inquiry under Part 5 of the Act not be held.Senior Adjudicator's decision to grant the Public Body's request that an inquiry under Part 5 of the Act not be held.
F10-05 Jun 7, 2010 Interior Health Authority Section 56
Senior Adjudicator's decision to grant the Public Body's request that an inquiry under Part 5 of the Act not be held.Senior Adjudicator's decision to grant the Public Body's request that an inquiry under Part 5 of the Act not be held.
F10-02 Apr 8, 2010 Vancouver Island Health Authority Section 56
Adjudicator's decision to deny public body's request that an inquiry under Part 5 of the Act not be held.Adjudicator's decision to deny public body's request that an inquiry under Part 5 of the Act not be held.
F10-04 Mar 16, 2010 Ministry of Public Safety and Solicitor General Preliminary / Jurisdictional
Adjudicator's decision that new evidence does not meet the test for re-opening Order F08-13. Other issues raised on the judicial reviews also do not trigger re-opening. Consideration of remaining records could proceed if order were not stayed.Adjudicator's decision that new evidence does not meet the test for re-opening Order F08-13. Other issues raised on the judicial reviews also do not trigger re-opening. Consideration of remaining records could proceed if order were not stayed.
F10-03 Mar 16, 2010 Ministry of Finance Preliminary / Jurisdictional
Adjudicator’s ruling that Ministry properly disclosed personal information to credit agency under s. 33.1 of FIPPA.Adjudicator’s ruling that Ministry properly disclosed personal information to credit agency under s. 33.1 of FIPPA.
F10-01 Feb 10, 2010 University of British Columbia Preliminary / Jurisdictional
Adjudicator's decision that notes are not in the custody or under the control of UBC. Hearing will not proceed on whether UBC met its duty to assist under s.6 of FIPPA.Adjudicator's decision that notes are not in the custody or under the control of UBC. Hearing will not proceed on whether UBC met its duty to assist under s.6 of FIPPA.
F09-05 Dec 16, 2009 Providence Health Care Society Preliminary / Jurisdictional Adjudicator's ruling on whether Providence Health Care Society is a public body under FIPPA.
Auth. (s.42) 03-01 Dec 16, 2009 BC Hydro & Power Authority Section 42 No summary available.
F09-04 Jun 22, 2009 Ministry of Housing and Social Development Section 43
The Ministry requested authorization to disregard eight outstanding requests from the respondent, as well as other relief. The Ministry is authorized to disregard four of the eight requests on the grounds that they are repetitious and unreasonably interfere with the Ministry’s operations. The Ministry is further authorized, for two years from the date of this decision, to disregard any future requests from the respondent in excess of one open request at a time.The Ministry requested authorization to disregard eight outstanding requests from the respondent, as well as other relief. The Ministry is authorized to disregard four of the eight requests on the grounds that they are repetitious and unreasonably interfere with the Ministry’s operations. The Ministry is further authorized, for two years from the date of this decision, to disregard any future requests from the respondent in excess of one open request at a time.
F09-03 Mar 4, 2009 Abbotsford Police Department Section 56
Senior Adjudicator's decision to grant the Public Body's request that an inquiry under Part 5 of the Act not be held.Senior Adjudicator's decision to grant the Public Body's request that an inquiry under Part 5 of the Act not be held.
F09-02 Feb 3, 2009 Ministry of Attorney General Section 56
Adjudicator's decision to deny public body's request that an inquiry under Part 5 of the Act not be held.Adjudicator's decision to deny public body's request that an inquiry under Part 5 of the Act not be held.
F09-01 Jan 8, 2009 Ministry of Public Safety and Solicitor General Preliminary / Jurisdictional
Commissioner's decision on public body's argument that an access applicant is not an "appropriate person."Commissioner's decision on public body's argument that an access applicant is not an "appropriate person."
F08-11 Dec 5, 2008 Law Society of British Columbia Section 56 Senior Adjudicator's decision not to proceed to inquiry under s. 56.
F08-10 Nov 26, 2008 Ministry of Environment Section 43
MoE requested authorization to disregard requests made by the respondent or others acting on her behalf. The respondent’s requests were found to be vexatious and MoE is authorized to disregard them to the date of the application. With the exception of one open access request at a time, MoE is also authorized to disregard the respondent’s requests for a two-year period from the date of this decision.MoE requested authorization to disregard requests made by the respondent or others acting on her behalf. The respondent’s requests were found to be vexatious and MoE is authorized to disregard them to the date of the application. With the exception of one open access request at a time, MoE is also authorized to disregard the respondent’s requests for a two-year period from the date of this decision.
F08-09 Nov 6, 2008 Ministry of Agriculture and Lands Section 43
MAL requested authorization to disregard requests made by the respondent or others acting on her behalf. The respondent’s requests were found to be vexatious and MAL is authorized to disregard them to the date of the application. With the exception of one open access request at a time, MAL is also authorized to disregard the respondent’s requests for a two-year period from the date of this decision.MAL requested authorization to disregard requests made by the respondent or others acting on her behalf. The respondent’s requests were found to be vexatious and MAL is authorized to disregard them to the date of the application. With the exception of one open access request at a time, MAL is also authorized to disregard the respondent’s requests for a two-year period from the date of this decision.
F08-08 Jul 24, 2008 Insurance Corporation of British Columbia Section 56 Senior Adjudicator's decision not to proceed to inquiry under s. 56.
F08-07 Jul 24, 2008 Ministry of Labour and Citizens' Services Preliminary / Jurisdictional Commissioner's decision on effect of third party requests for review.
F08-06 Jul 16, 2008 Township of Langley Section 56 Senior Adjudicator's decision not to proceed to inquiry under s. 56 regarding s. 22.
F08-05 Jul 16, 2008 Township of Langley Section 56 Senior Adjudicator's decision not to proceed to inquiry under s. 56 regarding s. 75.
N/A Jul 10, 2008 BC Transmission Corporation Section 42 No summary available.
F08-04 Mar 12, 2008 Capital Regional District Section 56 Adjudicator's decision not to proceed to inquiry under s. 56.
F08-03 Feb 27, 2008 The Board of Education of School District No. 34 (Abbotsford) Section 43
The School District requested authorization to disregard requests made by the respondent or others acting on the respondent’s behalf. The School District has not met its burden to demonstrate that, for the purposes of s. 43, the requests are frivolous or vexatious or repetitive and systematic.The School District requested authorization to disregard requests made by the respondent or others acting on the respondent’s behalf. The School District has not met its burden to demonstrate that, for the purposes of s. 43, the requests are frivolous or vexatious or repetitive and systematic.
F08-02 Jan 18, 2008 Insurance Corporation of British Columbia Preliminary / Jurisdictional
Senior Adjudicator's ruling on applicant's request to expand the scope of an inquiry at the inquiry stage.Senior Adjudicator's ruling on applicant's request to expand the scope of an inquiry at the inquiry stage.
F08-01 Jan 14, 2008 Interior Health Authority Section 56
Adjudicator's decision to deny public body's request that an inquiry under Part 5 of the Act not be held.Adjudicator's decision to deny public body's request that an inquiry under Part 5 of the Act not be held.
F07-10 Dec 13, 2007 Ministry of Public Safety and Solicitor General Section 56
The Office of the Chief Coroner’s request that an inquiry under Part 5 not be held is denied. Any party making an application under s. 56 must do more than simply assert that an exception applies. It must clearly demonstrate that its case meets the criteria established in previous orders. A mere belief that one’s case is strong is not the basis for a s. 56 application.The Office of the Chief Coroner’s request that an inquiry under Part 5 not be held is denied. Any party making an application under s. 56 must do more than simply assert that an exception applies. It must clearly demonstrate that its case meets the criteria established in previous orders. A mere belief that one’s case is strong is not the basis for a s. 56 application.
F07-09 Nov 2, 2007 District of Summerland Section 56
Adjudicator's decision to deny public body's request that an inquiry under Part 5 of the Act not be held.Adjudicator's decision to deny public body's request that an inquiry under Part 5 of the Act not be held.
F07-08 Sep 20, 2007 Provincial Health Services Authority and Children's & Women's Health Centre of British Columbia Section 43
The respondent’s request of May 17, 2006 is not frivolous or vexatious. The PHSA is not authorized to disregard this or any future requests from the respondent.The respondent’s request of May 17, 2006 is not frivolous or vexatious. The PHSA is not authorized to disregard this or any future requests from the respondent.
F07-07 Sep 7, 2007 Board of Education of School District No. 49 (Central Coast) Section 56
Adjudicator's decision to deny public body's request that an inquiry under Part 5 of the Act not be held.Adjudicator's decision to deny public body's request that an inquiry under Part 5 of the Act not be held.
F07-06 Aug 29, 2007 Vancouver Police Department Section 56
Commissioner's decision to deny public body's request that an inquiry under Part 5 of the Act not be held.Commissioner's decision to deny public body's request that an inquiry under Part 5 of the Act not be held.
F07-05 Aug 29, 2007 Vancouver Police Department Section 56 Adjudicator's decision not to proceed to inquiry under s. 56.
F07-04 Jul 23, 2007 District of West Vancouver Section 56 Adjudicator's decision not to proceed to inquiry under s. 56.
F07-03 Jun 22, 2007 Ministry of Economic Development Preliminary / Jurisdictional Commissioner's ruling on public body's request to add a late exception.
F07-02 Feb 6, 2007 City of Vancouver Section 56 Adjudicator's decision not to proceed to inquiry under s. 56.
F07-01 Jan 29, 2007 City of Chilliwack Section 56 Adjudicator's decision not to proceed to inquiry under s. 56.
F06-12 Dec 13, 2006 Ministry of Labour and Citizens' Services and Ministry of Education Section 43
The respondent’s past and outstanding requests are systematic and would unreasonably interfere with the Ministries’ operations. They are entitled to relief, in the circumstances, even in relation to requests to which they had not responded when required under FIPPA. The Ministries are authorized to disregard the outstanding and certain other requests.The respondent’s past and outstanding requests are systematic and would unreasonably interfere with the Ministries’ operations. They are entitled to relief, in the circumstances, even in relation to requests to which they had not responded when required under FIPPA. The Ministries are authorized to disregard the outstanding and certain other requests.
F06-11 Nov 21, 2006 University of British Columbia Section 56
Adjudicator's decision to deny public body's request that an inquiry under Part 5 of the Act not be held.Adjudicator's decision to deny public body's request that an inquiry under Part 5 of the Act not be held.
F06-10 Oct 24, 2006 The Board of School Trustees for School District No. 71 (Comox) Preliminary / Jurisdictional
Commissioner’s ruling on attempt by unions representing third-party teacher to argue applicability of discretionary disclosure exceptions not applied by the public body.Commissioner’s ruling on attempt by unions representing third-party teacher to argue applicability of discretionary disclosure exceptions not applied by the public body.
F06-09 Oct 12, 2006 The Board of School Trustees, School District No. 8 (Kootenay Lake) Section 56 Adjudicator's decision not to proceed to inquiry under s. 56.
F06-06 Sep 22, 2006 City of Vancouver Section 56 Adjudicator's decision not to proceed to inquiry under s. 56.
F06-08 Sep 1, 2006 Legislative Assembly & Office of the Clerk of Committees Preliminary / Jurisdictional
Commissioner's ruling on jurisdiction to hold an inquiry on records and correspondence submitted to a Special Committee of the Legislative Assembly held by the Office of the Clerk of Committees of the Legislative Assembly.Commissioner's ruling on jurisdiction to hold an inquiry on records and correspondence submitted to a Special Committee of the Legislative Assembly held by the Office of the Clerk of Committees of the Legislative Assembly.
F06-05 Jul 19, 2006 WorkSafeBC Section 56 Adjudicator's decision not to proceed to inquiry under s. 56.
F06-07 Jun 20, 2006 Fraser Health Authority Preliminary / Jurisdictional Commissioner's ruling on admissibility of expert evidence regarding s. 17 and s. 21 harm.
F06-04 May 24, 2006 City of Vancouver Section 56 Adjudicator's decision not to proceed to inquiry under s. 56.
F06-03 Mar 24, 2006 University of British Columbia Section 43
UBC applied for authorization under ss. 43(a) and (b) to disregard the respondent’s outstanding requests and any future requests for two years. For the purposes of s. 43(a), respondent’s requests found to be systematic and unreasonably to interfere with UBC’s operations. UBC is authorized to disregard respondent’s outstanding requests, requests received between date of application and date of decision. UBC is further authorized for two years to disregard respondent’s requests in excess of one open request at a time and is not required to spend more than 50 hours per year responding to respondent’s requests in each of the two years following this decision. It is not necessary to consider s. 43(b), although respondent’s requests had some trivial and purposeless aspects to themUBC applied for authorization under ss. 43(a) and (b) to disregard the respondent’s outstanding requests and any future requests for two years. For the purposes of s. 43(a), respondent’s requests found to be systematic and unreasonably to interfere with UBC’s operations. UBC is authorized to disregard respondent’s outstanding requests, requests received between date of application and date of decision. UBC is further authorized for two years to disregard respondent’s requests in excess of one open request at a time and is not required to spend more than 50 hours per year responding to respondent’s requests in each of the two years following this decision. It is not necessary to consider s. 43(b), although respondent’s requests had some trivial and purposeless aspects to them
F06-02 Jan 30, 2006 Provincial Health Services Authority Section 56 Adjudicator's decision not to proceed to inquiry under s. 56.
F06-01 Jan 10, 2006 Village of Sayward Section 56
Adjudicator's decision to deny public body's request that an inquiry under Part 5 of the Act not be held.Adjudicator's decision to deny public body's request that an inquiry under Part 5 of the Act not be held.
F05-08 Oct 25, 2005 University of British Columbia Section 56 Adjudicator's decision not to proceed to inquiry under s. 56.
F05-07 Sep 26, 2005 Regional District of Comox-Strathcona Section 56 Commissioner's decision not to proceed to inquiry under s. 56.
F05-06 Sep 1, 2005 Ministry of Health Section 56
Commissioner's decision to deny public body's request that an inquiry under Part 5 of the Act not be held.Commissioner's decision to deny public body's request that an inquiry under Part 5 of the Act not be held.
F05-04 Sep 1, 2005 Provincial Health Services Authority Section 56
Commissioner's decision to deny public body's request that an inquiry under Part 5 of the Act not be held.Commissioner's decision to deny public body's request that an inquiry under Part 5 of the Act not be held.
F05-05 Aug 11, 2005 Ministry of Environment Section 56 Commissioner's decision not to hold any inquiry because of mootness under s. 56,
F05-03 May 27, 2005 Provincial Health Services Authority Section 56 Commissioner's decision not to proceed to inquiry under s. 56.
F05-02 Apr 8, 2005 City of Victoria Section 56 Adjudicator's decision not to proceed to inquiry under s. 56.
F05-01 Feb 3, 2005 British Columbia Hydro & Power Authority Section 43
BC Hydro applied for relief under s. 43 on the grounds that respondent’s requests were repetitious and systematic and unreasonably interfered with BC Hydro’s operations, and that the requests were also frivolous and vexatious. BC Hydro entitled to relief under ss. 43(a) and (b) respecting last two requests, which are both systematic and repetitious, and unreasonably interfere with operations, and frivolous and vexatious.BC Hydro applied for relief under s. 43 on the grounds that respondent’s requests were repetitious and systematic and unreasonably interfered with BC Hydro’s operations, and that the requests were also frivolous and vexatious. BC Hydro entitled to relief under ss. 43(a) and (b) respecting last two requests, which are both systematic and repetitious, and unreasonably interfere with operations, and frivolous and vexatious.
N/A Dec 21, 2004 Vancouver Island Health Authority (“VIHA”) under s. 56 of the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (“Act”) regarding a request for review by an applicant under s. 52(1) of the Act Section 56 Commissioner's decision not to proceed to inquiry under s. 56.
N/A Nov 25, 2004 Request for review by an applicant under s. 52(1) of the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (“Act”) — Ministry of Public Safety and Solicitor General (“Ministry”) Section 56 Commissioner's decision not to proceed to inquiry under s. 56.
N/A Nov 25, 2004 Request by The Board of School Trustees of School District No. 42 (Maple Ridge-Pitt Meadows) (“School District”), public body, under s. 56 of the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (“Act”) Section 56 Commissioner's decision not to proceed to inquiry under s. 56.
Auth. (s. 43) 04-01 Sep 10, 2004 Vancouver Island Health Authority Section 43
VIHA applied for relief under s. 43 on the grounds that respondent’s requests were repetitious and systematic, and unreasonably interfered with VIHA’s operations, and that the requests were also frivolous and vexatious. Most requests not made under s. 5 of the Act and s. 43 therefore not applicable. Access requests do not meet the test of s. 43.VIHA applied for relief under s. 43 on the grounds that respondent’s requests were repetitious and systematic, and unreasonably interfered with VIHA’s operations, and that the requests were also frivolous and vexatious. Most requests not made under s. 5 of the Act and s. 43 therefore not applicable. Access requests do not meet the test of s. 43.
N/A Aug 18, 2004 Application by Translink to have the request by an applicant to proceed to an inquiry dismissed under s. 56(1) of the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (“Act”) Section 56 Adjudicator's decision to deny Translink's request that an inquiry not be held under s. 56(1).
Auth. (s. 43) 03-01 Dec 10, 2003 Ministry of Management Services Section 43
The respondent’s requests are not systematic, but even if they were systematic (or repetitious), responding to them does not unreasonably interfere with the Ministry’s operations. Nor is relief warranted on the basis that the respondent’s requests are frivolous or vexatious.The respondent’s requests are not systematic, but even if they were systematic (or repetitious), responding to them does not unreasonably interfere with the Ministry’s operations. Nor is relief warranted on the basis that the respondent’s requests are frivolous or vexatious.
N/A Nov 4, 2003 Request for Review – Working Opportunity Fund, Applicant (“WOF”) – Ministry of Attorney General (“Ministry”) Preliminary / Jurisdictional
Commissioner's decision on reconsideration of earlier decisions by his delegates to grant the WOF an extension of time, under s. 53(2)(b).Commissioner's decision on reconsideration of earlier decisions by his delegates to grant the WOF an extension of time, under s. 53(2)(b).
N/A Jul 9, 2003 Request for review by an applicant under s. 52(1) of the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act - – Simon Fraser University (“SFU”), public body Section 56 Commissioner's decision not to proceed to inquiry under s. 56.
N/A Mar 28, 2003 Inquiry under Part 5 of the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act – Robert Matas, The Globe and Mail (“applicant”) – Ministry of Attorney General (“Ministry”) Preliminary / Jurisdictional Ruling regarding application of s. 3(1)(h) to certain defence funding records.
N/A Nov 19, 2002 Inquiry under Part 5 of the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act – Ann Rees (“applicant”) – College of Pharmacists of British Columbia (“College”) – Ministry of Health Services (“Ministry”) Preliminary / Jurisdictional
Commissioner is satisfied that the Ministry has custody and control, and the College of Pharmacists has control, of a machine-readable PharmaNet record from which the requested record can be created.Commissioner is satisfied that the Ministry has custody and control, and the College of Pharmacists has control, of a machine-readable PharmaNet record from which the requested record can be created.
Auth. (s.43) 02-02 Nov 8, 2002 Insurance Corporation of British Columbia Section 43
The applicant, having settled his personal injury claim with ICBC in 1999, has made 18 access requests for information related to the settled claim. Having disclosed to the applicant all information related to the claim, and related matters, ICBC is entitled to the relief it seeks under s. 43(b) respecting the last two requests, which are frivolous and vexatious.The applicant, having settled his personal injury claim with ICBC in 1999, has made 18 access requests for information related to the settled claim. Having disclosed to the applicant all information related to the claim, and related matters, ICBC is entitled to the relief it seeks under s. 43(b) respecting the last two requests, which are frivolous and vexatious.
Auth. (s.43) 02-01 Sep 18, 2002 Ministry of Human Resources Section 43
The Ministry has received over 200 access requests from the respondent since 1994, with approximately 95 requests having been made between September and December 2001. Because the 95 access requests are repetitious and responding to them would unreasonably interfere with the Ministry’s operations, the Ministry is authorized to disregard them. The respondent is entitled to replace them with not more than two new requests before January 1, 2003, with the Ministry not being required to spend more than 7 hours responding to each such request. The Ministry is not authorized to refuse to respond to requests for one year from the date of this authorization, but between the date of this decision and September 17, 2004, it is authorized to disregard any requests in excess of one open request from the respondent at any given time and any request that seeks records already disclosed to the respondent. The Ministry is not required to spend more than 7 hours responding to each request.The Ministry has received over 200 access requests from the respondent since 1994, with approximately 95 requests having been made between September and December 2001. Because the 95 access requests are repetitious and responding to them would unreasonably interfere with the Ministry’s operations, the Ministry is authorized to disregard them. The respondent is entitled to replace them with not more than two new requests before January 1, 2003, with the Ministry not being required to spend more than 7 hours responding to each such request. The Ministry is not authorized to refuse to respond to requests for one year from the date of this authorization, but between the date of this decision and September 17, 2004, it is authorized to disregard any requests in excess of one open request from the respondent at any given time and any request that seeks records already disclosed to the respondent. The Ministry is not required to spend more than 7 hours responding to each request.
N/A May 10, 2002 Ministry of Water, Land & Air Protection (“Ministry”) – Order 01-52 Preliminary / Jurisdictional
Decision to deny the request by the Guide Outfitters Association and two guides to re-open the inquiry leading to Order 01-52.Decision to deny the request by the Guide Outfitters Association and two guides to re-open the inquiry leading to Order 01-52.
N/A Dec 12, 2001 Inquiry under Part 5 of the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act – Lheidli T’enneh First Nation (“applicant”) – Ministry of Attorney General (“public body”) Preliminary / Jurisdictional
Denial of request by applicant's counsel to review in camera submissions and affidavits and to review unsevered copies of the records in dispute.Denial of request by applicant's counsel to review in camera submissions and affidavits and to review unsevered copies of the records in dispute.
N/A Apr 26, 2001 Release of Resident Lists to Elections BC Preliminary / Jurisdictional
Advice that Elections BC has no authority or reason to request lists of residents from residential care homes for purposes of voter registration, although homes may provide such lists with residents' consent.Advice that Elections BC has no authority or reason to request lists of residents from residential care homes for purposes of voter registration, although homes may provide such lists with residents' consent.
Auth. (s.42) 01-01 Apr 19, 2001 Ministry of Health & Ministry Responsible for Seniors Section 42 No summary available.
N/A Feb 28, 2001 Inquiry Regarding Canadian Pacific Railway Company ("CPR"), Greater Vancouver Transportation Authority ("Translink"), 'The Vancouver Province' and another applicant Preliminary / Jurisdictional
Decision to proceed with inquiry using a delegate after considering objections by CPR (third party) that the Commissioner is biased and objections to including, Translink, the public body as a party.Decision to proceed with inquiry using a delegate after considering objections by CPR (third party) that the Commissioner is biased and objections to including, Translink, the public body as a party.
N/A Sep 12, 2000 Request for Review between an applicant and the Office of the Police Complaint Commissioner Preliminary / Jurisdictional
Decision that certain records of the Police Complaint Commissioner are excluded from the scope of the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act by s. 3(1)(c) of that Act.Decision that certain records of the Police Complaint Commissioner are excluded from the scope of the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act by s. 3(1)(c) of that Act.
N/A Jul 28, 2000 Request for Review between [the Applicant] and the Office of the Police Complaint Commissioner Preliminary / Jurisdictional
Decision that Commissioner does not have jurisdiction to proceed with an inquiry regarding certain records in the custody or under the control of the Police Complaint Commissioner, on the grounds that they are excluded from the scope of the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act by s. 66.1 of the Police Act.Decision that Commissioner does not have jurisdiction to proceed with an inquiry regarding certain records in the custody or under the control of the Police Complaint Commissioner, on the grounds that they are excluded from the scope of the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act by s. 66.1 of the Police Act.
N/A May 12, 2000 Complaint Under the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act Regarding ICBC’s Collection of Personal Information Preliminary / Jurisdictional Dismissal of complaint about ICBC including a driver's weight on driver's license.
N/A May 8, 2000 Request for Review between [the Applicant] and the Vancouver Police Department Preliminary / Jurisdictional
Decision that there is no issue remaining for Commissioner to determine in an applicant's request for review of a decision by the Vancouver Police Department.Decision that there is no issue remaining for Commissioner to determine in an applicant's request for review of a decision by the Vancouver Police Department.
N/A Apr 12, 2000 Request for Review between [the Applicant] and the British Columbia Police Commission Preliminary / Jurisdictional
Decision that the Commissioner does not have jurisdiction to proceed with an inquiry regarding an applicant's request for review of the BC Police Complaints Commission's search for requested records, on the grounds that the BC Police Complaints Commission was not a public body under the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act at the time of the request.Decision that the Commissioner does not have jurisdiction to proceed with an inquiry regarding an applicant's request for review of the BC Police Complaints Commission's search for requested records, on the grounds that the BC Police Complaints Commission was not a public body under the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act at the time of the request.
Auth. (s.43) 99-01 Dec 22, 1999 Vancouver Police Board Section 43
Applicant public body had received 3,874 requests, over approximately five years, of which 24 were made by respondent individual. No evidence presented by public body of unreasonable interference with its operations caused by the respondent's access requests. Guidance given by Commissioner as to kinds of evidence needed on such issues. Applicant public body had received 3,874 requests, over approximately five years, of which 24 were made by respondent individual. No evidence presented by public body of unreasonable interference with its operations caused by the respondent's access requests. Guidance given by Commissioner as to kinds of evidence needed on such issues.
N/A Jan 29, 1998 City of Vancouver Section 43 As a result of a successful judicial review, a reconsideration of this decision is attached.
N/A Dec 19, 1997 Law Society of British Columbia Section 43 No summary available.
N/A Oct 16, 1997 Ministry of Human Resources Section 43 No summary available.
N/A Aug 18, 1997 Public Service Employee Relations Commission Section 43 No summary available.
N/A Apr 11, 1997 Ministry of Attorney General Section 43 No summary available.
N/A Mar 7, 1997 Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food Section 43 No summary available.
N/A Oct 31, 1996 B.C. Transit Corporation Section 43 No summary available.
N/A Aug 30, 1996 Vancouver School Board Section 43 No summary available.
N/A Aug 23, 1996 Ministry of Employment and Investment Section 43 No summary available.
N/A May 27, 1996 BC Hydro & Power Authority Section 43 No summary available.
N/A Mar 31, 1994 BC Lottery Corporation Section 43 No summary available.