Office of the Saskatchewan Information and Privacy Commissioner. Guide to LA FOIP, Chapter 4, Exemptions from the Right of Access. Updated 24 July 2025. 124 Subsection 16(1)(c) Advice from officials 16(1) Subject to subsection (2), a head may refuse to give access to a record that could reasonably be expected to disclose: … (c) positions, plans, procedures, criteria or instructions developed for the purpose of contractual or other negotiations by or on behalf of the local authority, or considerations that relate to those negotiations; Subsection 16(1)(c) of LA FOIP is a discretionary class-based exemption. It permits refusal of access in situations where release of a record could reasonably be expected to disclose positions, plans, procedures, criteria, or instructions developed for the purpose of contractual or other negotiations by or on behalf of a local authority. It also covers considerations related to those negotiations. Examples of the type of information that could be covered by this exemption are the various positions developed by a local authority’s negotiators in relation to labour, financial and commercial contracts.439 Subsection 16(1)(c) of LA FOIP protects as a class the strategies and tactics employed or contemplated by local authorities for the purpose of negotiations. Such information can be protected from disclosure even after the negotiations have been completed.440 The following test can be applied:441 1. Does the record contain positions, plans, procedures, criteria or instructions? a. Developed for the purpose of contractual or other negotiations b. By or on behalf of the local authority 439 Service Alberta, FOIP Guidelines and Practices: 2009 Edition, Chapter 4, p. 181. 440 Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat, Access to Information Manual, Chapter 11.18.5. Available at https://www.canada.ca/en/treasury-board-secretariat/services/access-information-privacy/accessinformation/access-information-manual.html#cha11_18. Accessed May 9, 2023. 441 May 2023 SK OIPC changed its test. Similar provisions exist in legislation in Manitoba, Alberta, Northwest Territories, Nunavut, New Brunswick, Prince Edward Island and Newfound and Labrador. The SK OIPC test aligns with AB IPC’s test for its similarly worded provision. See AB IPC Order 99-013 at [41]. NWT IPC also relied on AB IPC test in Order 99-013 in Review Report 06-057 at p. 10.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTgwMjYzOA==