Summary

37231

Sheldon Blank v. Minister of Justice

(Federal) (Civil) (By Leave)

Keywords

None.

Summary

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 – Exemptions – Solicitor-client privilege – Jurisdiction of Federal Court – Whether the Crown’s conduct in the prosecution as it related to the Access to Information request amounted to bad faith and blameworthy conduct – What role should the court play in adjudicating a bad faith claim? – Whether the Federal Court has jurisdiction to hear a complaint regarding s. 4 (2.1) of the Access to Information Act – Access to Information Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. A-1, ss. 4 (2.1) and 41.

Sheldon Blank made an application under s. 41 of the Access to Information Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. A-1, for records dealing with the ongoing civil litigation between the parties. In response, the Department of Justice sent 194 redacted pages, claiming the redacted portions constituted exemptions under the Act. Mr. Blank complained to the Office of the Information Commissioner, however the Commissioner declared the Department had properly claimed the exemptions. Mr. Blank applied to the Federal Court for judicial review of the Department’s decision to deny him access to requested records. He also alleged bad faith and/or blameworthy conduct by the Department. While awaiting the judicial review, the Department disclosed a further 111 pages of redacted documents that were attachments to previously released documents it said had been inadvertently omitted. The Department continued to claim the same exemptions under the Act for its refusal to disclose the redacted information. Mr. Blank did not, however, make a complaint to the Commissioner in respect of the redacted attachments. The issue of the Federal Court’s jurisdiction to review the disclosure of those attachments was raised before the case management judge who deferred it to the application judge.

The Federal Court dismissed the applicant’s application for judicial review under s. 41 of the Access to Information Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. A-1, for lack of jurisdiction. Nevertheless, the court found that the exemptions, in particular solicitor-client privilege, had been properly claimed and there was no evidence of abuse of process or blameworthy conduct that would vitiate that privilege. The Federal Court of Appeal dismissed the applicant’s appeal, finding the applications judge made no errors.

Lower Court Rulings

June 16, 2015
Federal Court

T-2065-09, 2015 FC 753
Applicant’s application for judicial review, dismissed.
June 23, 2016
Federal Court of Appeal

A-378-15, 2016 FCA 189
Applicant’s appeal, dismissed.
 

loading