Office of the Saskatchewan Information and Privacy Commissioner. Guide to FOIP, Chapter 4, Exemptions from the Right of Access. Updated 8 April 2024. 270 IPC Findings In Review Report 052-2013, the Commissioner considered the equivalent provision in LA FOIP. An applicant had made an access to information request to the Village of Buena Vista (the Village) for copies of records that detail the funds charged to the Village on behalf of certain council members, repayment plans and the legal fees paid by the Village on the Mayor’s behalf. The Village responded to the applicant indicating that some records did not exist and that the invoices were being withheld pursuant to subsections 18(1) and 21(a) of LA FOIP. Upon review, the Village pointed to the Supreme Court of Canada (SCC) decision Maranda v. Richer, [2003] 3 S.C.R. 193, 2003 SCC 67. In that decision, the SCC determined that there was a presumption of privilege for lawyers’ bills of account as a whole. The Commissioner found that the presumption of privilege could be rebutted if an applicant could provide persuasive argument that the disclosure of information could not result in the applicant learning of information subject to solicitor-client privilege. The Commissioner relied on the Court of Appeal for Ontario decision, Ontario (Ministry of Attorney General) v. Ontario (Assistant Information and Privacy Commissioner), [2005] OJ No 941 where the court summarized the approach as follows: 1. Is there any reasonable possibility that disclosure of the amount of the fees paid will directly or indirectly reveal any communication protected by the privilege? and 2. Could an assiduous inquirer, aware of background information, use the information requested to deduce or otherwise acquire privileged communications? (School District No. 49 (Central Coast) v. British Columbia (Information and Privacy Commissioner), 2012 BCSC 427) After considering the submission from the Applicant, the Commissioner was not persuaded that release of information, namely the fees detailed in the invoices, was neutral information and that the presumption of privilege was rebutted. The Commissioner found that subsection 21(a) of LA FOIP applies to the invoices in their entirety. The Commissioner took a similar approach in Review Reports 280-2016 & 281-2016 and 003-2017.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTgwMjYzOA==