IPC - Office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner/Ontario

Français

Site Map

Advanced Search

Subject Index Listing

Reconsideration Table

Judicial Review of Municipal Orders

Judicial Review of Provincial Orders

Judicial Review of Privacy Complaint Reports

The Acts

Recent Orders

I93-016M

Document		I93-016M


Institution/HIC		INVESTIGATION REPORT INVESTIGATION I93-016M A MUNICIPALITY


Summary		INTRODUCTION Background of the Complaint This investigation was initiated as a result of a complaint concerning a named Municipality (the Municipality). The complainant, an employee of the Municipality's licensing commission, was a Workers' Compensation Board (WCB) claimant, and a recipient of long-term disability (LTD) benefits from the Municipality. Her complaint was that embarrassing medical information about herself, contained in a WCB Decision Review Specialist's Report (the Report) had been disclosed by the Municipality to a named insurance company and to non-medical staff at the licensing commission, contrary to the Municipal Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (the Act ). The complainant advised that she had not given her consent for disclosure of the Report to the insurance company or to licensing commission staff. The complainant maintained that when she had worked for the licensing commission, she had seen similar reports herself, and was aware that no medical personnel were employed by the licensing commission. In the complainant's view, licensing commission staff should not have had access to her sensitive medical information. The complainant also contended that the Report was improperly disclosed at an arbitration hearing arising from grievances she had filed against the Municipality, relating to WCB payments she had received from the Municipality, pending the Report's decision. Issues Arising from the Investigation The following issues were identified as arising from the investigation: (A) Was the information contained in the Report "personal information" as defined in section 2(1) of the Act ? If yes, (B) Did the Municipality disclose the personal information to the licensing commission, in accordance with section 32 of the Act ? (C) Did the Municipality disclose the personal information to the insurance company, in accordance with section 32 of the Act ? (D) Did the Municipality disclose the personal information at the arbitration hearing in accordance with section 32 of the Act ? RESULTS OF THE INVESTIGATION Issue A: Was the information contained in the Report "personal information" as defined in section 2(1) of the Act ? Section 2(1) of the Act defines "personal information", in part, as: recorded information about an identifiable individual, including, (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, (emphasis added) (h) the individual's name if 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; We reviewed the Report and found that it contained the complainant's medical history. We also noted that it contained information concerning the WCB advances paid to the complainant by the Municipality, and references from physicians and other specialists related to workplace accommodation to address the complainant's physical limitations. In our view, the information in the Report met the requirements of paragraphs (b) and (h) of the definition of "personal information" in section 2(1) of the Act . Conclusion: The information contained in the Report was personal information, as defined in section 2(1) of the Act . Issue B: Did the Municipality disclose the personal information to the licensing commission, in accordance with section 32 of the Act ? The complainant's concern centred on the disclosure of the Report to non-medical staff at the licensing commission. The complainant felt that the licensing commission only needed to know whether her WCB claim had been approved or denied. Under the Act , an institution shall not disclose personal information in its custody or under its control, except in the circumstances outlined in section 32. The Ministry stated that its treasury department had disclosed the Report to the licensing commission, which functions as a department of the Municipality in its relationship to other departments. It was thus the Municipality's view that the disclosure had been internal to the Municipality, and was in accordance with section 32(d) of the Act , i.e., disclosure to an officer or employee of the institution who needed the record in the performance of his or her duties. However, for the purposes of the Act , the licensing commission is considered to be a separate institution from the Municipality. Therefore, we examined the application of section 32(c) of the Act to the Municipality's disclosure to the licensing commission. This section states: An institution shall not disclose personal information in its custody or under its control except, (c) for the purpose for which it was obtained or compiled or for a consistent purpose; The Municipality advised that its treasury department had obtained the Report from the WCB for administrative purposes including computer updating of claims information and for distribution to the affected "department", in this case, the licensing commission. The licensing commission was responsible for WCB claims management which included payroll recording and the payments of benefits. The Municipality stated that the Accounting Supervisor and the Payroll Clerk had access to the Report in order to perform their administrative duties related to claims management. The Report was also disclosed to the Director of Administration in order to respond to questions directed to him from the complainant. The Municipality also advised that such WCB reports generally included information related to "prognosis, re-training and rehabilitation, workplace accommodation requirements and any other factors which are relevant". The affected "department" assesses a report's decision to help determine whether an appeal should be filed with the WCB and to respond to the issues addressed in the rep


Legislation		MFIPPA 2(1) personal information (b) 2(1) personal information (h) 32(c)


Subject Index		consent to disclosure implied consent


Published		May 25, 1994


Type		Privacy Complaint Report


<< Back

Main Menu