|
Summary
|
|
NATURE OF THE APPEAL: The City of Hamilton (the City) received a request from a journalist under the Municipal Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy (the Act ). The request was for access to records relating to fire prevention activities carried out by the City's Fire Department (the Fire Department) at a specified address (the property), including any references to the business located at that address and/or references to two named individuals. These two individuals are the directors and officers of the business. The requester wanted documents covering the period January 1, 1997 to the date of the request (December 16, 1997). On January 15 and March 19, 1998, the City contacted the requester to clarify his request, and sent a letter to the requester on April 24, 1998 confirming that the request covers the period January 1, 1997 to the date of the letter, April 24, 1998. The City identified 3,461 paper records, 88 photographs and two videotapes. The City decided that seven records were non-responsive, and divided the remaining records into the following 20 categories in responding to the requester: 1. Monitoring Notes, February 1998 - April 1998 2. Letters, e-mail messages, orders, June 1997 - April 1998 3. Inventory lists, Recommendations, letters, e-mail messages, facsimiles, court documents, invoices, February 1998 - April 1998 4. Facsimiles, memoranda, telephone messages, bids, proposal documents, March 1998 - April 1998 5. Weigh Bills, April 1998 6. Tender Documents, bids, facsimiles, memoranda, letters, e-mail messages, March 1998 - April 1998 7. E-mail messages, facsimiles, court documents, November 1997 - January 1998 8. Letters, Agreements, invoices, e-mail messages, quotations, contracts, facsimiles, November 1997 - April 1998 9. Videotapes, photographs, October 1997 - February 1998 10. Letters, facsimiles, business cards, staff assignments, December 1997 - March 1998 11. Business cards, invoices, calendars, e-mail messages, memoranda, Recommendations, facsimiles, December 1997 - February 1998 12. Inventory lists, lease agreement, December 1997 - February 1998 13. Notes, Inspection Reports, Fire Code Information, inventory breakdown, court documents, facsimile, June 1997 - January 1998 14. Facsimiles, Material Safety Data Sheets, November 1997 - April 1998 15. Court documents, notes, Corporation Profile Reports, February 1997 - November 1997 16. Business card, court documents, Corporation Profile Reports, Fire Code Information, Registry/Land Titles, e-mail messages, letters, February 1997 - March 1998 17. Court documents, Fire Marshal Orders, letters, February 1997 - December 1997 18. E-mail messages, October 1997 - April 1998 19. Letters, facsimiles, notes, memoranda, Corporation Profile Reports, Recommendations, inventory list, press release, e-mail messages, orders, inspection reports, notices, court documents, June 1997 - March 1998 20. Notes, summaries, February 1997 - April 24, 1998 After resolution of a fee appeal and a time extension appeal in connection with this request, the City issued its access decision. The requester was provided with full access to 154 records and partial access to 61 others. The City denied access to the remaining records and parts of records on the basis of one or more of the following exemption claims: section 7(1) - advice or recommendations sections 8(1)(a), (b), (c) and (g), and 8(2)(a) and (c) - law enforcement sections 10(1)(a) and (c) - third party commercial information sections 11(d) and (e) - economic and other interests of the City section 12 - solicitor-client privilege section 14(1) - invasion of privacy The City also directed the requester to locations, including land and business registration offices, where responsive public records could be obtained. The City denied access to the seven records it characterized as non-responsive. The requester, now the appellant, appealed the City's decision. During mediation, the City issued a second decision to the appellant, claiming that 15 records qualified for exemption under section 15(a) of the Act (information available to the public). However, the appellant agreed not to pursue access to these 15 records, as well as 162 others that were available at either the Land Registry Office or the Companies Branch of the Ministry of Consumer and Commercial Relations. These 177 records and the section 15(a) exemption claim are no longer at issue in this appeal. As a result, 3,040 paper records remain at issue. Of these, 2,979 were withheld in full and the other 61 in part. These paper records include letters, facsimiles, memoranda, monitoring forms, file notes, corporate searches, e-mail notes, tender documents, court documents, inventory sheets, and various other related documents. All 88 photographs and the two videotapes also remain at issue. The records are described in greater detail in the index attached as Appendix A to this order. I have adopted the City's page numbering system from the index. This system assigns a record number to each page, even though many of the documents are more than 1 page in length. As a result, a 2-page document would be referred to, for example, as "Records 412-413". Following the completion of mediation, I sent a Notice of Inquiry to the City and the appellant outlining the issues to be considered during the inquiry. I received written representations from the City, but not from the appellant. During the course of this inquiry, the Court of Appeal issued its decision in General Accident Assurance Co. v. Chrusz (1999), 45 O.R. (3d) 321(Ont. C.A.). This case dealt extensively with the law of litigation privilege. I sent a Supplementary Notice of Inquiry to the parties, providing them with an opportunity to provide representations on the impact of General Accident on the litigation privilege component of se
|