Office of the Saskatchewan Information and Privacy Commissioner. Guide to LA FOIP, Chapter 4, Exemptions from the Right of Access. Updated 24 July 2025. 56 Section 14 of LA FOIP uses the word could versus “could reasonably be expected to” as seen in other provisions of LA FOIP. The threshold for could is somewhat lower than a reasonable expectation. The requirement for could is simply that the release of the information could have the specified result. There would still have to be a basis for asserting the outcome could occur. If it is fanciful or exceedingly remote, the exemption should not be invoked.206 Records that existed before an investigation commenced, such as regular reporting information, may not qualify for the exemption.207 A local authority cannot rely on subsection 14(1)(c) of LA FOIP for a record that: a) Provides a general outline of the structure or programs of a law enforcement agency; or b) Reports, by means of statistical analysis or otherwise, on the degree of success achieved in a law enforcement program (see subsection 14(2) of LA FOIP). IPC Findings In Review Report 023-2019, 098-2019, an applicant was denied access to a portion of the records by the Saskatoon Police Service (SPS) pursuant to subsection 14(1)(c) of LA FOIP. In its submission, the SPS stated the records related to matters that contravened section 88 and subsection 175(1)(a) of the Criminal Code and violated Saskatoon City bylaw #7565. Based on this, the Commissioner was satisfied that the matter related to a lawful investigation, and also agreed with the SPS’s assertion that release of the information could reveal information with respect to a lawful investigation. As such, the Commissioner found that SPS properly applied subsection 14(1)(c) of LA FOIP. In Review Report 030-2020, 050-2020, the Commissioner reviewed whether the Ministry of Government Relations (Government Relations) appropriately applied the equivalent subsection 15(1)(c) of The Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (FOIP) to records withheld from an applicant. Part of the Commissioner’s review considered whether Government Relations’ activity qualified as a “lawful investigation” for purposes of the first part of the test for subsection 15(1)(c) of FOIP. Government Relations asserted that the interpretation to the phrase “with respect to” in CanadianOxy Chemicals Ltd. v. Canada (Attorney General), [1999] 1 SCR 743, 1999 CanLII 680 (SCC) at [15] to [17]. Summary of this can be found in Gardner, J., and Gardner K. (2016) Sangan’s Encyclopedia of Words and Phrases Legal Maxims, Canada, 5th Edition, Volume 5, S to Z at p. w-97. 206SK OIPC Review Reports LA-2007-001 at [117], LA-2013-001 at [35], F-2014-001 at [149]. 207 SK OIPC Review Report 223-2016 at [36] to [37].
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTgwMjYzOA==