Office of the Saskatchewan Information and Privacy Commissioner. Guide to FOIP, Chapter 3, Access to Records. Updated 5 May 2023. 127 records. Requiring employees to be subjected to and to respond to offensive, intimidating, threatening, insulting conduct or comments can have a detrimental effect on well-being.213 The government institution should address any of the above factors that apply. Depending on the nature of the case, one factor alone or multiple factors in concert with each other can lead to the second part of the test being met. IPC Findings In Disregard Decision 343-2019, 352-2019 the Commissioner considered section 45.1 of FOIP for the first time. The Saskatchewan Worker’s Compensation Board (WCB) applied to the Commissioner for authorization to disregard two access to information requests that an applicant had made to the WCB. The Commissioner found that the applicant’s two requests were repetitious and an abuse of the right of access pursuant to subsection 45.1(2)(b) of FOIP. As such, the Commissioner authorized the WCB to disregard the two access to information requests. In Disregard Decision 181-2021, 182-2021, the Commissioner considered an application from Saskatchewan Government Insurance (SGI) to disregard two access to information requests from an applicant. SGI asserted that the two access to information requests should be disregarded on the grounds that the requests amounted to an abuse of the right of access pursuant to subsections 45.1(2)(b) and (c) of FOIP. Specifically, SGI asserted the access to information requests were vexatious and not submitted in good faith. The Commissioner considered subsection 45.12(2)(c) of FOIP first at the request of SGI. While considering the application, the Commissioner noted that it was not the first disregard application from SGI involving the applicant and that the Commissioner had previously issued three disregard decisions and one Review Report. In each of the disregard cases, the Commissioner found the applicant’s conduct amounted to an abuse of the right of access. The current disregard application would be the fourth from SGI involving the applicant. Considering this and the additional arguments submitted by SGI in this case, the Commissioner found that SGI had established reasonable grounds for finding the applicant’s two requests were vexatious and not made in good faith within the meaning of subsection 45.1(2)(c) of FOIP. As a result of this finding, the Commissioner did not need to consider subsection 45.1(2)(b) of FOIP. However, the Commissioner noted that in the past three disregard decisions involving the applicant and SGI, the Commissioner had found that subsection 45.1(2)(b) of FOIP applied because of the applicant’s conduct and as the circumstances in the present case were similar, it would likely result in a similar finding. Most notable in this disregard decision, is the 213 Fifth factor adopted from AB IPC Order F2015-16 at [39] to [54]. Added to criteria in SK OIPC Review Report 053-2015 at [15] and [38] to [41].
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTgwMjYzOA==