Office of the Saskatchewan Information and Privacy Commissioner. Guide to FOIP, Chapter 3, Access to Records. Updated 5 May 2023. 161 If the parties cannot agree, a court application will have to be made to determine the procedure to be used, what is filed sealed, what is argued in camera and what is argued in open court. The court will determine this procedure and issue an order. In camera, in private or in the judge’s private chambers.266 ii. The second step will be the actual argument by the parties as has been previously directed by the judge or agreed by the parties.267 In the recent Saskatchewan Court of Appeal decision, Leo v Global Transportation Hub Authority, 2020 SKCA 91 (CanLII), the court clarified the de novo nature of an appeal pursuant to 57 of FOIP. Part VII of FOIP does not in any way contemplate that, on an appeal to the Court of King’s Bench, parties can raise any and all provisions of the Act that bear on the question of whether the record in issue may be released. The system of the Act offers no room for a direct appeal to the Court of King’s Bench from the decision of a head, i.e., an appeal that circumvents the application to the Commissioner for a review.268 SECTION 59: EXERCISE OF RIGHTS BY OTHER PERSONS Exercise of rights by other persons 59 Any right or power conferred on an individual by this Act may be exercised: (a) where the individual is deceased, by the individual’s personal representative if the exercise of the right or power relates to the administration of the individual’s estate; (b) where a personal guardian or property guardian has been appointed for the individual, by the guardian if the exercise of the right or power relates to the powers and duties of the guardian; (c) where a power of attorney has been granted, by the attorney if the exercise of the right or power relates to the powers and duties of the attorney conferred by the power of attorney; (d) where the individual is less than 18 years of age, by the individual’s legal custodian in situations where, in the opinion of the head, the exercise of the right or power would not constitute an unreasonable invasion of the privacy of the individual; or 266 Adapted from Garner, Bryan A., 2019. Black’s Law Dictionary, 11th Edition. St. Paul, Minn.: West Group at p. 909. 267 SK OIPC Resource, Guide to Appealing the Decision of a Head of a Government Institution, or a Local Authority, or a Health Trustee at p. 10. 268 Leo v Global Transportation Hub Authority, 2020 SKCA 91 (CanLII) at [41] and [47].
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTgwMjYzOA==