Office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner. Guide to FOIP, CHAPTER 5, Third Party Information. Updated 9 March 2023. 106 2. … For a sample model letter233 see the Ministry of Justice, Access and Privacy Branch’s sample titled, 16 Notification to Third Party under Sec 37 – Decision of Government Institution and 17 Notification to Applicant under section 37 – Decision of Government Institution. If the head of the government institution concerned, having considered the representations, decides to release the information requested, the third party may apply to the IPC for a review of that decision.234 The 20-day timeline on third parties to request a review is a requirement as subsection 49(4) of FOIP reiterates the 20-day timeline on third parties. If the 20-day timeline is missed, a review will not be commenced. If the head of the government institution concerned decides to withhold the third party information requested, the applicant may apply to the IPC for a review of that decision. However, the 20-day timeline to request a review noted at subsection 37(2)(a) of FOIP is not a requirement of applicants, but rather an option – applicants are “entitled” to request the review - it is a right. Unlike third parties, applicants have one year to request a review of a section 37 decision of a government institution pursuant to subsection 49(2) of FOIP. If the one-year timeline is missed, a review will not be commenced. Section 49 of FOIP provides the circumstances under which an applicant or third party can request a review by the Commissioner. Third parties and applicants who wish to make a request for review can do so using Form B found in The Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Regulations. The form should be completed and provided to the IPC along with a copy of the government institution’s section 37 notice of decision. Any other relevant information, such as other communications with the government institution, can also be attached. The IPC will also accept requests for review that are not on Form B provided the request is in writing and contains the same elements of information as Form B. For more, see section 49 later in this Chapter. 233 For other samples of model letters by the Access and Privacy Branch, Ministry of Justice see publications. Saskatchewan.ca/#/categories/340. 234 Air Atonabee Ltd. v. Canada (Minister of Transport), [1989] F.C.J. No. 453 at p. 2.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTgwMjYzOA==