Office of the Saskatchewan Information and Privacy Commissioner. Guide to FOIP, Chapter 3, Access to Records. Updated 5 May 2023. 110 subsections 12(1) or 12(2) of FOIP.166 Therefore, government institutions should ensure that the section 7 decision letter is provided to the applicant within the period of the extension. For more on notices to third parties, see the Guide to FOIP, Chapter 5, “Third Party Information”. IPC Findings In Review Report 311-2017, 312-2017, 313-2017, 316-2017, 340-2017, 341-2017, 342-2017, the Commissioner considered the timeframe under which the Global Transportation Hub (GTH) provided its response to an applicant. The Commissioner found that the GTH issued a fee estimate 25 days into the original 30-day deadline. Once the fee estimate was issued, the clock stopped until the applicant paid a 50% deposit. Once paid, this left only five days for GTH to provide a section 7 response. GTH then extended the response time an additional 30 days pursuant to subsection 12(1)(a) of FOIP. However, the GTH failed to provide a response within the extended 30-day deadline. GTH explained that the primary reason for the delay was significant objection by the third party to release of information. The Commissioner recommended that the GTH amend its procedures so that even where it is extending the response period, it ensures it is providing notice to third parties no later than the 30th day of the initial 30-day deadline. This would minimize the likelihood of GTH putting itself in a “deemed refusal” situation in the future. In Review Report 322-2021, 030-2022, the Commissioner found that the Ministry of Health (Health) failed to provide the section 7 decision letter to the applicant within the period of extension. As such, the Commissioner found that Health was not in compliance with subsection 12(3) of FOIP and as a result, the Commissioner did not need to consider whether Health was in compliance with subsections 12(1) or 12(2) of FOIP. In Review Report 164-2021, the Commissioner found that the Ministry of Corrections, Policing and Public Safety (Corrections) failed to provide the section 7 decision letter to the applicant within the period of extension. As such, the Commissioner found that Corrections was not in compliance with section 12(3) of FOIP and as a result the Commissioner did not need to consider whether Corrections had complied with subsections 12(1) or 12(2) of FOIP. The Commissioner recommended Corrections follow its obligations pursuant to subsection 12(3) of FOIP. 166 SK OIPC Review Reports 322-2021, 030-2022at [19], 164-2021 at [124].
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTgwMjYzOA==