What's New

The Applicant made an access request under the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (the FOIP Act) to the University of Alberta (the Public Body) for records containing any information relating to action taken by the Public Body regarding four complaints he had made. The Public Body searched for and located responsive records. It severed some information from them under section 24 (advice from officials) and as “non-responsive”. The Applicant questioned whether he had received all responsive records and also sought review of the Public Body’s severing decisions. Prior to the inquiry, the Public Body decided to provide… Read More...

Fine imposed was the third largest fine in history of the Act A former employee of Alberta Health Services (AHS) has been fined $12,000 for the offence of knowingly using and creating health information in contravention of the Health Information Act (HIA). The Office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner (OIPC) opened an offence investigation into this matter in June 2023 after AHS submitted a breach report to the OIPC. After the investigation, in March 2024, the OIPC charged Hind Mahmoud Dabash with falsifying Covid-19 immunization records of nearly 200 people from September 3, 2021 to November 24, 2021 while… Read More...

An Applicant made an access request to Alberta Justice and Solicitor General (now Justice, the Public Body) under the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (the FOIP Act) for records relating to the process for obtaining McNeil disclosures from the Edmonton Police Service. The Public Body responded by providing some information to the Applicant but withholding most of the information in the responsive records under sections 17(1), 20(1), 21(1), 24(1), 25(1), and 27(1). The Applicant requested an inquiry regarding the Public Body’s application of sections 17(1), 20(1), 24(1), 25(1), and 27(1), as well as the Public Body’s characterization… Read More...

Under the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (the FOIP Act), the Applicant made an access to information request to Brazeau County (the Public Body). The Applicant sought the names of those who received rebates through the Public Body’s Herbicide Rebate Program (the Program). The Public Body withheld the names on the basis that disclosing them would be an unreasonable invasion of third party personal privacy pursuant to section 17(1) of the FOIP Act. The Adjudicator found that the names were details of a discretionary benefit of a financial nature granted by the Public Body under section 17(2)(h)… Read More...

A joint resolution on transparency by default, calling for a new standard in government service, was issued by Canada’s privacy authorities after their annual meeting in Toronto in October 2024. A news release on the resolution was issued on December 10, 2024. The resolution is available on the website of the Office of the Information Commissioner of Canada. Transparency by default – Information Regulators Call for a New Standard in Government Service December 2024 Read More...

Gatineau, Québec – In a joint resolution, Canada’s information commissioners and ombuds from federal, provincial, and territorial jurisdictions are pressing their respective governments to prioritize transparency in the design and implementation of new systems, administrative processes, procedures, and governance models. This resolution reflects the need for a new standard in government operations and a collective commitment to fostering a culture of transparency and accountability across all levels of government in Canada. Canada’s information and privacy regulators believe that by adhering to eight key principles, public bodies and institutions can enhance public trust and ensure that government actions and decisions are… Read More...

A joint resolution on responsible information-sharing in situations involving intimate partner violence was issued by Canada’s privacy authorities after their annual meeting in Toronto in October 2024.  The resolution is available on the website of the Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada. Responsible information-sharing in situations involving intimate partner violence November 2024 Read More...

The Applicant is an employee of the Government of Alberta.  The Applicant made an access request under the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (the FOIP Act) to the Public Service Commission (the Public Body) for information regarding an application she had made for vaccination exemption status. The Public Body located responsive records, but severed information from them under sections 17(1) (disclosure harmful to personal privacy), 18 (disclosure harmful to individual or public safety), 19 (confidential evaluations), 20 (disclosure harmful to law enforcement), 24 (advice from officials) and 25 (disclosure harmful to the economic and other interests of… Read More...

The Applicant made an access request to Medicine Hat College (the Public Body) under the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (the FOIP Act). The Applicant stated: Please provide records, including reports, briefing notes, meeting notes and communication (email messages and other correspondence) pertaining to projects for an emergency notification system and mobile app through Campus Alberta Risk Assurance (CARA) and/or Mount Royal University. In particular, provide records specifying the following terms: CARA, RallyEngine, CutCom, AppArmor, SafeSpace, information escrow, sexual violence reporting, Virtual Safewalk, working/studying alone, work/study alone, SoloSafe, RFP, and proposal. The Public Body searched for responsive… Read More...

Under the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (the FOIP Act), the Applicant made an access to information request to the University of Calgary (the Public Body), seeking records related to receipt and handling of a registered letter. The Applicant sought review of the Public Body’s response to the request, and whether it met its duties under section 10(1) of the FOIP Act, and properly withheld information as subject to solicitor-client privilege under section 27(1)(a) of the FOIP Act. The Adjudicator found that the Public Body met its duties under section 10(1). The Adjudicator found that, contrary to… Read More...

Challenges highlighted include a spike in reports of abandoned health records and an alarming trend of snooping into health information EDMONTON – The 2023-2024 Annual Report of the Office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner (OIPC) of Alberta was tabled today by the Speaker of the Alberta Legislative Assembly and has now been published online by the OIPC. “The 2023-24 year can best be characterized as a year of change and engagement for the office as we worked to tackle the goals set out in our Strategic Business Plan 2024-2027,” said Commissioner Diane McLeod. “We worked to re-design a number… Read More...

Toronto, Ontario – Privacy authorities across Canada have issued a joint resolution to guide the responsible disclosure of personal information in situations involving intimate partner violence (IPV). Finalized at their October annual meeting, hosted by the Information and Privacy Commissioner of Ontario, the resolution aims to empower organizations and their staff to make informed decisions about privacy, confidentiality, and public safety. IPV is a pervasive problem in Canada, primarily harming women and gender-diverse individuals. In 2023, there were 123,319 victims (aged 12 years and older) of intimate partner violence reported to police. While alarming, this statistic very likely underrepresents the… Read More...

An applicant (the Applicant) made an access to information request to Justice (the Public Body) under the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (the FOIP Act). Canadian National Railway Company is an affected third party in the inquiry into the Public Body’s response to the access request (the Affected Third Party). In the course of the inquiry, the Affected Third Party raised an argument that the records at issue in the inquiry were not properly responsive to the access request. The Adjudicator found that the Affected Third Party’s argument about responsiveness raised a separate issue: whether an affected… Read More...

Read More...

Read More...

The Office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner (OIPC) of Alberta has published comments and a call for changes to two new access to information and privacy bills tabled in the legislative assembly earlier this month by the Alberta government. The bills are designed to create two new pieces of legislation to replace the existing public sector access and privacy law, the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (FOIP Act). Information and Privacy Commissioner Diane McLeod is strongly recommending improvements to both bills before they are passed. “The modernization of the FOIP Act is crucial, as it has… Read More...

On November 20, 2024, the Office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner provided comments to the Government of Alberta regarding Bills 33 and 34, which were tabled in the Legislative Assembly of Alberta on November 6, 2024. The bills are designed to create two new pieces of legislation to replace the existing public sector access and privacy law, the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (FOIP Act). Please click here to read the OIPC's letter and comments to the Minister of Technology and Innovation, Nate Glubish, on Bill 33. Please click here to read the OIPC's letter and… Read More...

Under the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (the FOIP Act), the Applicant made an access request to the Medicine Hat Police Service (the Public Body). The Applicant sought a review of whether the Public Body complied with the timelines set under section 11 of FOIP Act. The Public Body admitted that it failed to meet the timelines, and the Adjudicator concluded the same. When explaining why it missed the deadlines, the Public Body expressed the view that section 3(a) of the FOIP Act excused it from providing records in response to an access request where those records… Read More...

An Applicant made a request to Environment and Protected Areas (the Public Body) under the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (FOIP Act) for records created in response to a previous access request. The Public Body responded to the Applicant, providing records with information withheld under several exceptions. The Applicant requested an inquiry into the Public Body’s application of section 24(1), including its exercise of discretion in applying that provision. The Adjudicator found that section 24(1) applied to some of the information withheld under that provision. The Adjudicator ordered the Public Body to disclose to the Applicant the… Read More...

An Applicant made a request to Treasury Board and Finance (the Public Body) under the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (FOIP Act) for records created in response to a previous access request. The Public Body responded to the Applicant, providing records with information withheld under several exceptions. The Applicant requested an inquiry into the Public Body’s application of section 24(1), including its exercise of discretion in applying that provision. The Adjudicator found that section 24(1) applied to some of the information withheld under that provision. The Adjudicator ordered the Public Body to disclose to the Applicant the… Read More...