Privacy or Access to Information for Public Complaints (5:IV): Difference between revisions
From Clicklaw Wikibooks
Privacy or Access to Information for Public Complaints (5:IV) (view source)
Revision as of 23:07, 29 November 2022
, 29 November 2022→2. Scope of Freedom of Information Rights
| Line 153: | Line 153: | ||
It is worth noting that some of the exceptions are mandatory (sections 12, 18.1, 21 and 22 on third-party business) and others discretionary (section 13 to 18 and 18 to 20. There is also public interest override in section 25, which requires disclosure of information about risk of significant harm to the environment, or public health or safety, or in other circumstances where disclosure is clearly in the public interest. | It is worth noting that some of the exceptions are mandatory (sections 12, 18.1, 21 and 22 on third-party business) and others discretionary (section 13 to 18 and 18 to 20. There is also public interest override in section 25, which requires disclosure of information about risk of significant harm to the environment, or public health or safety, or in other circumstances where disclosure is clearly in the public interest. | ||
'''NOTE:''' In ''[https://www.oipc.bc.ca/orders/995 Re South Coast BC Transportation Authority]'', [2009] BCIPCD No 20, it was decided that Translink was a public body. Thus, public disclosure of employment records for Translink employees would not be an unreasonable invasion of third party privacy. However, this was based on a rebuttal of the presumption that a disclosure of personal information is an unreasonable invasion of a third party’s personal privacy if the personal information describes the third party's finances, income, etc. A change of circumstances could change the outcome. In ''[https://www.canlii.org/en/ca/scc/doc/2009/2009scc31/2009scc31.html?resultIndex=1 Greater Vancouver Transportation Authority v Canadian Federation of Students – British Columbia Component]'',[2009] 2 SCR 295, Translink was found to be a government entity under section 32 of the ''Charter of Rights and Freedoms'' [''Charter''], and thus subject to ''Charter'' scrutiny. | :'''NOTE:''' In ''[https://www.oipc.bc.ca/orders/995 Re South Coast BC Transportation Authority]'', [2009] BCIPCD No 20, it was decided that Translink was a public body. Thus, public disclosure of employment records for Translink employees would not be an unreasonable invasion of third party privacy. However, this was based on a rebuttal of the presumption that a disclosure of personal information is an unreasonable invasion of a third party’s personal privacy if the personal information describes the third party's finances, income, etc. A change of circumstances could change the outcome. In ''[https://www.canlii.org/en/ca/scc/doc/2009/2009scc31/2009scc31.html?resultIndex=1 Greater Vancouver Transportation Authority v Canadian Federation of Students – British Columbia Component]'',[2009] 2 SCR 295, Translink was found to be a government entity under section 32 of the ''Charter of Rights and Freedoms'' [''Charter''], and thus subject to ''Charter'' scrutiny. | ||
=== 3. Scope of Privacy Rights === | === 3. Scope of Privacy Rights === | ||
