Case information

None.

Case summaries are prepared by the Office of the Registrar of the Supreme Court of Canada (Law Branch). Please note that summaries are not provided to the Judges of the Court. They are placed on the Court file and website for information purposes only.

Access to information — Personal information — Exemptions — Request for access to information concerning education and employment history of employees of government institution before they were hired — Whether information had to be disclosed because it was information about “an individual who is or was an officer or employee of a government institution that relates to the position or functions of the individual” — Access to Information Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. A 1, s. 19(1) — Privacy Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. P 21, s. 3, “personal information” and (j).

The applicant, Mr. Nault, made a request under the Access to Information Act for the disclosure of documents submitted by 61 candidates who had been hired in four competitions in which he had been an unsuccessful candidate. The respondent Minister disclosed a series of records but refused to disclose personal information relating to the education, degrees, membership in professional organizations and private sector work experience of the persons covered by the request. The refusal was based on s. 19(1) of the Access to Information Act, which prevents the disclosure of any record that contains “personal information” as defined in s. 3 of the Privacy Act. Under s. 3(b) of the Privacy Act, information relating to the education and employment history of “an identifiable individual” is personal information and, as a rule, must not be disclosed.

Mr. Nault then applied to the Federal Court for a review of the matter. He argued that the requested information was sufficiently related to the positions in question to be covered by the exemption in s. 3(j) of the Privacy Act, which provides that the definition of “personal information” does not include information about “an individual who is or was an officer or employee of a government institution that relates to the position or functions of the individual”. The Federal Court dismissed the application and the Federal Court of Appeal affirmed the decision.