Today’s article should be of interest to anyone who applies the mandatory third party exemption in section 17(1) of FIPPA (or its equivalent in section 10(1) of MFIPPA) to purchase agreements, service agreements, and supporting documents such as the records of discussions surrounding decisions to purchase products and/or services.
The Divisional Court of Ontario recently unanimously affirmed a decision of the Information and Privacy Commissioner of Ontario (IPCO) describing how the mandatory third party exemption in section 17(1) of FIPPA applies to information supplied by a vendor during the procurement process and to the resulting service agreement itself.
Issuing compliant written notices can be deceptively complicated, given the multiple sources of rules and guidance that come into play. Unfortunately, as seen above, issuing a notice which fails to meet the requirements can lead to an adverse decision against the institution in an appeal before IPCO.
“Exemptions Not To Apply” Both the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (FIPPA) and the Municipal Freedom Of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (MFIPPA) contain a special provision referred to as the “public interest override”. Appearing in FIPPA s. 23 and MFIPPA s. 16, this language of this provision is essentially theContinue reading “The Public Interest Override”
“The overarching purpose of access to information legislation, then, is to facilitate democracy. It does so in two related ways. It helps to ensure first, that citizens have the information required to participate meaningfully in the democratic process, and secondly, that politicians and bureaucrats remain accountable to the citizenry .” Dagg v Canada (Minister ofContinue reading “Filing an FOI request is not defamation”