Office of the Saskatchewan Information and Privacy Commissioner. Guide to FOIP, Chapter 4, Exemptions from the Right of Access. Updated 8 April 2024. 214 Commissioner distinguished this case from Review Report 054-2015 and 055-2015, where the unit prices were provided on a blank Form of Tender provided by the City of Regina to bidders. The Commissioner noted that unlike the other case, the bidding process was concluded, the successful bidder was selected, and a contract was already awarded. The Commissioner found that the unit prices and lump sum prices were not supplied by the third party but were negotiated terms of the contract that both parties agreed to. As the second part of the test was not met, the Commissioner found that subsection 19(1)(b) of FOIP was not appropriately applied. The third party appealed the Commissioner’s decision to the Court of King’s Bench where Justice Zarzeczny in Canadian Bank Note Limited v Saskatchewan Government Insurance, considered the facts and circumstances in the de novo appeal, agreed that the information was commercial information of the third party but found that the unit prices were supplied to SGI by the third party.763 In Review Report 052-2017, the Commissioner considered subsection 19(1)(b) of FOIP. An applicant made an access to information request to Saskatchewan Power Corporation (SaskPower) for a copy of an appraisal related to SaskPower’s purchase of land from the Global Transportation Hub. SaskPower responded to the applicant denying access to the appraisal citing subsections 19(1)(b) and (c) of FOIP. The third party responsible for developing the appraisal provided a submission to the Commissioner for consideration. The third party asserted, in part, that release of the appraisal would infringe on the third party’s copyright to the integrity of its work in accordance with the Copyright Act, RSC 1985 c. C-42. The Commissioner did not agree with this line of reasoning. The Commissioner referred to subsection 32.1(1)(a) of the Copyright Act which provided that disclosing under access to information legislation is not an infringement of copyright. The Commissioner could not find that the information was technical information as asserted by the third party as insufficient evidence was provided. As the first part of the test was not met, the Commissioner found that subsection 19(1)(b) of FOIP did not apply to the appraisal. Subsection 19(1)(c) Third party information 19(1) Subject to Part V and this section, a head shall refuse to give access to a record that contains: … (c) information, the disclosure of which could reasonably be expected to: 763 Canadian Bank Note Limited v Saskatchewan Government Insurance, 2016 SKQB 362 (CanLII) at [36] to [39].
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTgwMjYzOA==