ACCESS TO INFORMATION |
Canada Post Corp. v. Canada (Minister of Public Works and Government Services)
T-1265-02
2004 FC 270, Heneghan J.
24/2/04
20 pp.
Judicial review of decision of Minister of Public Works and Government Services Canada (respondent) to release portions of certain records relating to applicant, in severed form, on ground records partially exempt from disclosure pursuant to Access to Information Act (Act), s. 20(1)(b)--Whether records exempt from disclosure under Act, ss. 20(1)(b) (confidential, commercial or technical information) and 20(1)(c) (disclosure could prejudice applicant's competitive position)--Burden of showing record within excepted class on party seeking to prevent disclosure--As to s. 20(1)(b) exemption, records constitute "commercial information" as term generally understood, but information not confidential in nature, having regard to indicia of confidentiality described in Air Atonabee Ltd. v. Canada (Minister of Transport) (1989), 27 C.P.R. (3d) 180 (F.C.T.D.)--While manner in which information compiled apparently done on confidential basis, manner in which information communicated to respondent not showing applicant held reasonable expectation of confidence information would not be disclosed at some future time-- Third criterion identified in Air Atonabee (whether relationship between government institution and third party fostered for public benefit in keeping information confidential) not applicable--Information in question related to applicant's bid for government contract--No benefit to public would be lost in not disclosing information at issue--Public policy rationale underlying Act that disclosure of information provided to government institution rule, not exception--Head of government institution correctly assessed nature of records in issue--Determination certain parts of records could be severed properly made--Applicant failed to adduce probative evidence remainder of records qualify for exemption in Act, s. 20(1)(b)--As to disclosure exemption under s. 20(1)(c), exemption from access requires proof of reasonable expectation of probable harm--Vague or speculative affidavit evidence insufficient to establish reasonable expectation of probable harm required by s. 20(1)(c)--Applicant failed to discharge onus--Information in disputed records in severed form not of such nature that release would likely injure competitive position of applicant or enhance financial benefit of any competitors--No basis upon which to grant exemption from disclosure of disputed strategy document--Application dismissed--Access to Information Act, R.S.C., 1985, c. A-1, s. 20(1).