Office of the Saskatchewan Information and Privacy Commissioner. Guide to LA FOIP, Chapter 4, Exemptions from the Right of Access. Updated 24 July 2025. 243 by the courts that a reviewing body’s decision to examine privileged documents must never be made lightly or as a matter of course.830 Therefore, given the importance of solicitor-client privilege and litigation privilege, and to minimally infringe on these privileges, the Commissioner will only order production of records being withheld under solicitor-client or litigation privilege pursuant to subsection 21(a) of LA FOIP when it is absolutely necessary to decide the issues in dispute. Absolutely necessary is as restrictive a test as may be formulated short of an absolute prohibition in every case.831 As to when it would be appropriate to order production of records withheld under the solicitor-client or litigation privilege provision at subsection 21(a) of LA FOIP, the Commissioner will exercise discretion in the following circumstances: • Where there is some evidence that the party claiming privilege has done so ‘falsely” or inappropriately.832 • When the party claiming privilege fails to respond to a reasonable request by the Commissioner for additional information.833 A naked “trust me” that the records in dispute are subject to solicitor-client privilege or litigation privilege is not sufficient from the local authority when making the case that subsection 21(a) of LA FOIP applies.834 In a review, the Commissioner requests copies of records in order to conduct the review and determine whether exemptions have been appropriately applied. This includes requesting records which a local authority may have claimed solicitor-client privilege or litigation privilege over pursuant to subsection 21(a) of LA FOIP. The local authority may choose to make a “prima facie” case of solicitor-client or litigation privilege for those records pursuant 830 University of Saskatchewan v Saskatchewan (Information and Privacy Commissioner), 2018 SKCA 34 (CanLII) at [73], [76], and [83]. 831 Goodis v. Ontario (Ministry of Correctional Services), 2006 SCC 31 (CanLII), [2006] 2 SCR 32 at [20]. 832 University of Saskatchewan v Saskatchewan (Information and Privacy Commissioner), 2018 SKCA 34 (CanLII) at [53], [54] and [72]. 833 University of Saskatchewan v Saskatchewan (Information and Privacy Commissioner), 2018 SKCA 34 (CanLII) at [83]. 834 University of Saskatchewan v Saskatchewan (Information and Privacy Commissioner), 2018 SKCA 34 (CanLII) at [75].
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTgwMjYzOA==