|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Document
|
|
P-1206
|
|
|
|
|
|
File #
|
|
P-9600034
|
|
|
|
|
|
Institution/HIC
|
|
Ministry of Consumer and Commercial Relations
|
|
|
|
|
|
Summary
|
|
NATURE OF THE APPEAL: The Ministry of Consumer and Commercial Relations (the Ministry) received a request for access to all its files in which the requester was named personally and named in his position as a bailiff. The requester also sought access to the Ministry's files on a numbered company which he had owned. The request was submitted under the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (the Act ). The Ministry identified numerous responsive records and granted partial access to them. The Ministry provided the requester with an index describing all the records. The index indicated that some of the records were being withheld, either in full or in part, on the basis of the following exemptions in the Act : advice and recommendations - section 13(1) law enforcement - sections 14(1)(d) and 14(2)(a) invasion of privacy - section 21(1) solicitor-client privilege - section 19 The requester appealed the denial of access. This office sent a Notice of Inquiry to the Ministry, the appellant and three other individuals whose interests could be affected by disclosure of some of the information in the records (the affected persons). Because the records appeared to contain the personal information of the appellant, the Notice raised the possible application of sections 49(a) and (b) of the Act . Section 49(a) gives the Ministry the discretion to refuse to disclose to the appellant his personal information when the exemptions in sections 13(1), 14 and 19 would apply. The Ministry may also refuse to disclose to the appellant his personal information if to do so would constitute an unjustified invasion of another individual's personal privacy (section 49(b)). Representations were received from the Ministry and one of the affected persons. The records at issue and the exemptions claimed for each are listed in Appendix "A" to this order. They fall into three general categories: complaints and supporting documentation; general documentation, including correspondence from the police, the Ministry of the Attorney General and court orders; and the Ministry investigator's file notes. The records are numbered according to the system used by the Ministry in its index. Where an individual record consists of multiple pages and/or discrete documents some of which are duplicated in other records, I have numbered the pages individually so as to identify the duplicate pages. For example, I have broken down Record 15 into two parts: pages 15.1-15.2 and 15.3-15.4 as the latter two pages are duplicates of pages 35.40-35.41. My decision on any particular page will also apply to subsequent duplicate pages. I have also numbered the pages separately when only certain pages of a multiple page record are at issue, the balance having been previously disclosed by the Ministry. This is the case with respect to Record 70. The Ministry has disclosed the first page (page 70.1) and only a portion of the second page (page 70.2) remains at issue. DISCUSSION: PERSONAL INFORMATION/DISCRETION TO DENY ACCESS TO REQUESTER'S OWN INFORMATION Under section 2(1) of the Act , "personal information" is defined, in part, to mean recorded information about an identifiable individual, including the individual's name where it appears with other personal information relating to the individual or where the disclosure of the name would reveal other personal information about the individual. I have reviewed the records to determine if they contain personal information and, if so, to whom the personal information relates. The Ministry submits that the records do not contain the personal information of the appellant but rather concern allegations of impropriety against him as a bailiff and not as a private citizen. In this regard, the Ministry notes that previous decisions of this office have determined that a sole proprietorship is not an "individual" for the purposes of personal information. This submission appears to be a reference to the comments made by former Commissioner Sidney B. Linden in Order 16 where he stated: The use of the term "individual" in the Act makes it clear that the protection provided with respect to the privacy of personal information relates only to natural persons. Had the legislature intended 'identifiable individual' to include a sole proprietorship, partnership, unincorporated association or corporation, it could and would have used the appropriate language to make this clear. The types of information enumerated under subsection 2(1) of the Act as 'personal information' when read in their entirety, lend further support to my conclusion that the term 'personal information' relates only to natural persons. However, in Order 113, the former Commissioner expanded upon this position. He stated: It is, of course, possible that in some circumstances, information with respect to a business entity could be such that it only relates to an identifiable individual, that is, a natural person, and that information might qualify as that individual's personal information. I believe that this is one of those cases. Many of the complaints outlined in the records detail matters outside the sphere of the appellant's business functions. There are Ministry documents indicating concerns about the potential criminal activities of the appellant in addition to the manner in which the business was operating. There are comments about the manner and style in which the appellant dealt with individuals with whom he was involved. In my view, the nature and scope of this information extends beyond that which one would consider to be solely about a business entity. Furthermore, as I indicated at the beginning of this order, the appellant's request included access to "all files in which he was named personally". In these particular circumstances, I find that all of the records contain the personal information of the appellant. Records 20, 74.1, 74.3 and 75 contain solely the personal information of the appellant. The balance of the records also contain the personal information of several other identifiable individuals, including those who filed complaints against the appellant and the affected persons. The records also contain references to police officers, Crown counsel and Ministry personnel. These references relate to these individuals in their employment or professional capacities and, as such, I find they do not constitute
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legislation
|
|
-
FIPPA
-
14(1)(d)
-
14(2)(a)
-
Section 19
-
13(1)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Subject Index
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Signed by
|
|
Anita Fineberg
|
|
|
|
|
|
Published
|
|
Jun 14, 1996
|
|
|
|
|
|
Type
|
|
Order
|
|
|
|
|
|
<<
Back
|
|
|
|
Back to Top
|
 |
|
|
|
© Copyright
2013
Information and Privacy Commissioner of Ontario. All Rights Reserved.
|