Office of the Saskatchewan Information and Privacy Commissioner. Guide to LA FOIP, Chapter3, Access to Records. Updated 5 May 2023. 78 The Ministry of Justice and Attorney General issued a resource titled, Preparing a Cost Estimate: Fees and Fee Estimates For Access Requests Under FOIP. Although focused on FOIP, it provides assistance with understanding fees and preparing fee estimates and similar provisions are found in LA FOIP. In November 2014, the IPC posted a guest blog on its website from the former Sun Country Health Region, titled, Using an Index to Clarify an Access Request and Reduce the Cost. The blog provides advice on how to handle fees and provides an example of a template that can be used to break down a fee estimate. IPC Review of Fee Estimates Subsection 38(1)(a.1) of LA FOIP provides that an applicant can make a request for review to the Commissioner if the applicant is not satisfied that a reasonable fee was estimated by the local authority. Reviews involving fee estimates can occur both at the time the fee estimate was issued or after the fee has already been paid and records provided to an applicant. For all fee reviews, the IPC requires details on how the fee amount was arrived at. This includes how fees were calculated for search, preparation and reproduction of the record. For this reason, a local authority should retain details and notes about its search, preparation, and reproduction so it can support the amount of the fee estimate in the event of a review. Fee estimates under LA FOIP are generally judged on the basis of whether they are reasonable and equitable: A fee estimate is reasonable when it is proportionate to the work required on the part of the local authority to respond efficiently and effectively to the applicant’s request. A fee estimate is equitable when it is fair and even-handed, that is, when it supports the principle that applicants should bear a reasonable portion of the cost of producing the information they are seeking, but not costs arising from administrative inefficiencies or poor records management practices.125 125 SK OIPC Review Report 2005-005 at [21].
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTgwMjYzOA==