|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Document
|
|
P-10
|
|
|
|
|
|
File #
|
|
880042
|
|
|
|
|
|
Institution/HIC
|
|
Ministry of the Solicitor General
|
|
|
|
|
|
Summary
|
|
Order in Appeal No. 880091). I find no error by the head in the exercise of his discretion in favour of charging a fee in this case, subject to consideration of the issue of fee waiver, below. ISSUE B: Whether the head's decision not to waive fees under subsection 57(3) of the Act was in accordance with the terms of the Act . Subsection 57(3) provides that: 57.-(3) A head may waive the payment of all or any part of an amount required to be paid under this Act where, in the head's opinion, it is fair and equitable to do so after considering, (a) the extent to which the actual cost of processing, collecting and copying the record varies from the amount of the payment required by subsection (1); (b) whether the payment will cause a financial hardship for the person requesting the record; (c) whether dissemination of the record will benefit public health or safety; (d) whether the record contains personal information relating to the person who requested it; and (e) any other matter prescribed in the regulations. I considered the interpretation of the wording of subsection 57(3) in a previous order (see my Order in Appeal Number 880091). In that case I found that "the wording of subsection 57(3) creates an exhaustive list of the matters to be considered by the head in determining if a waiver of all or any part of a fee is appropriate." If a head properly decides that a fee should be charged under subsection 57(1), he must then consider whether or not any of the enumerated matters in subsection 57(3) apply. I believe that the responsibility lies with the requester to provide adequate evidence to support a claim for fee waiver. In this case the appellant has claimed financial hardship under subsection 57(3) (b), but he has offered no evidence to support his claim. Accordingly, I find that the appellant has not demonstrated financial hardship in this case, and I support the institution's position that the grounds for waiver under subsection 57(3) do not apply. Therefore, the appeal is di
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legislation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Subject Index
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Signed by
|
|
Sidney Linden
|
|
|
|
|
|
Published
|
|
Jul 29, 1988
|
|
|
|
|
|
Type
|
|
Order
|
|
|
|
|
|
<<
Back
|
|
|
|
Back to Top
|
 |
|
|
|
© Copyright
2013
Information and Privacy Commissioner of Ontario. All Rights Reserved.
|