Office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner. Guide to FOIP, CHAPTER 5, Third Party Information. Updated 9 March 2023. 129 A of IPC resource, Guide to Appealing the Decision of a Head of a Government Institution, or a Local Authority, or a Health Trustee. 4. The applicant, individual or third party that launches the appeal is responsible for serving the government institution with the Originating Application once filed with the court. 5. Once the Originating Application is filed and served, the parties are embarking on a two-step procedure: i. The first step involves determining whether the parties can agree or whether the court will have to decide what is filed sealed and what is argued in camera or in open court. Because of the nature of the appeal, the government institution will have filed sealed records (both unredacted and redacted) which means they are not seen by the other parties to the appeal. If the parties agree that submissions need not be filed sealed and the representations can be made in open court, the parties can proceed directly to argue the appeal. 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.261 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.262 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 section 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.263 Although heard 261 Adapted from Garner, Bryan A., 2019. Black’s Law Dictionary, 11th Edition. St. Paul, Minn.: West Group at p. 909. 262 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. 263 Leo v Global Transportation Hub Authority, 2020 SKCA 91 (CanLII) at [41] and [47].
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTgwMjYzOA==