Kevin Yip

The requester sought records relating to advice given to the Minister of Finance regarding amendments to the Corporations Tax Act.

The Ministry refused disclosure under s. 13(1) of the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act, claiming the records contained advice or recommendations.

The adjudicator ordered disclosure, finding no evidence the records went to the final decision-maker and that they did not suggest a single course of action.

The Divisional Court upheld this decision.

On appeal, the Court of Appeal found the adjudicator's interpretation unreasonable, holding that s. 13(1) protects the deliberative process, including drafts and options, without requiring proof of delivery to the ultimate decision-maker or a single recommended course of action.

The requester sought access to documents relating to advice given to the Minister of Finance regarding the effective date of amendments to the Corporations Tax Act.

The adjudicator ordered disclosure, finding that the 'advice or recommendations' exemption under s. 13(1) of the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act did not apply because the documents did not suggest a single course of action and there was no proof they were communicated to the final decision-maker.

The Divisional Court upheld this decision.

The Court of Appeal allowed the Minister's appeal, holding that the adjudicator's interpretation of s. 13(1) was unreasonable as it failed to protect the deliberative process and the range of options presented to a decision-maker.