|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Document
|
|
MO-1378
|
|
|
|
|
|
File #
|
|
MA-000264-1
|
|
|
|
|
|
Institution/HIC
|
|
York Regional Police Service
|
|
|
|
|
|
Summary
|
|
NATURE OF THE APPEAL: The appellant wrote to the York Regional Police (the Police) seeking access under the Municipal Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (the Act ) to negatives and all photographs produced from negatives taken by the Police of two named individuals on a specified date. The Police identified five photographs and negatives responsive to the request and denied access to them on the basis of the exemption at section 14(1)(f) (unjustified invasion of personal privacy). The Police also stated that the presumption at section 14(3)(b) (personal information compiled as part of a law enforcement investigation) was applicable. The appellant appealed the decision of the Police to this office. In his letter of appeal, the appellant stated that his grounds for appeal were as follows: Sub-section 14(3)(b) of the Act has been misapplied and misinterpreted by [the Police] and, as a result [they] used it to deny my request. Sub-section 14(3)(b) of the Act , makes no reference to photographs. [The Police] erroneously [applied their] view and failed to consider and disregarded the plain language of the sub-section. [The Police] failed to confine and address the sub-section to the specific language thereof and instead went on a frolic and assigned a patently unreasonable interpretation of the Act . In fact, the very same photographs that were taken by the police, which I am requesting, have already been disclosed and used in court in both Civil and Criminal court which were open to the public and, therefore, the photographs are both public knowledge and property. Once all the information is made public with respect to evidence, transcripts etc. then, the information being requested should not and cannot be deemed as being personal information or an unjustified invasion of personal privacy as [the Police] would like us to think just by citing the wrong sub-section of the Act and, on the basis of [their] view as [they] put it. An additional and very important factor which [the Police] failed to address which ultimately justifies granting my request is the fact that I presently possess [named individual's] Plaintiff's Production Book [specified court file number] Ontario Court (General Division). The book contains personal and medical information including three of her colour photographs in the size of 8 ½" by 11". The reproduction of the same photographs is exactly what I have been requesting. Please take note that the book was in fact given to me by [named individual's] lawyer [named lawyer] in a civil proceeding. Since [named individual] gave me her photographs through her lawyer it could no longer be presumed that disclosure of the same photographs would constitute an unjustified invasion of personal privacy in any way whatsoever. Therefore, sub-section 14(3)(b) of the Act cannot be applied or referred to in any manner. Take note that I am willing and able to provide to you or to anyone interested in having this book with the photographs for inspection in order to prove my claim that I possess it. If [the Police] had knowledge of the fact that I possessed the Plaintiff's Production Book [they] would have had to grant my request. The lack of knowledge led [them] to render an unjust decision. On the basis of the above noted information and, if you decide to grant part of my request with only [named individual] photographs it will be satisfactory. During the mediation stage of the appeal, the appellant clarified that he was still seeking access to the photographs of both named individuals. I sent a Notice of Inquiry setting out the issues in the appeal to the appellant, who sent representations in response. In the circumstances, I determined that it was not necessary for me to seek representations from the Police or the two named individuals. RECORDS: The records at issue in this appeal consist of five photographs and five corresponding negatives, which include pictures of both named individuals. DISCUSSION: PERSONAL INFORMATION In order for the section 14 personal privacy exemption to apply, the information in question must qualify as "personal information". The term "personal information" is defined in section 2(1) of the Act as follows: In this Act , "personal information" means recorded information about an identifiable individual, including, (a) information relating to the race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, age, sex, sexual orientation or marital or family status of the individual, (b) information relating to the education or the medical, psychiatric, psychological, criminal or employment history of the individual or information relating to financial transactions in which the individual has been involved, (c) any identifying number, symbol or other particular assigned to the individual, (d) the address, telephone number, fingerprints or blood type of the individual, (e) the personal opinions or views of the individual except where they relate to another individual, (f) correspondence sent to an institution by the individual that is implicitly or explicitly of a private or confidential nature, and replies to that correspondence that would reveal the contents of the original correspondence, (g) the views or opinions of another individual about the individual, and (h) 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; The appellant submits: Under section 2(1
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legislation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Subject Index
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Signed by
|
|
David Goodis
|
|
|
|
|
|
Published
|
|
Dec 12, 2000
|
|
|
|
|
|
Type
|
|
Order
|
|
|
|
|
|
<<
Back
|
|
|
|
Back to Top
|
 |
|
|
|
© Copyright
2013
Information and Privacy Commissioner of Ontario. All Rights Reserved.
|