Rady J.

The applicant sought judicial review of an Information and Privacy Commissioner order requiring the disclosure of commercial benchmarking data provided to the Treasury Board Secretariat.

The applicant argued the adjudicator misapprehended evidence and applied too high a standard of proof for the third-party records exemption under s. 17(1) of the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act.

The Divisional Court dismissed the application, finding the adjudicator reasonably concluded the applicant failed to demonstrate a reasonable expectation of probable harm to its competitive position if the redacted information was disclosed.

The applicant sought judicial review of a university tribunal's decision upholding her required withdrawal from a family medicine residency program.

She argued that the university's unilateral decision to amend her schedule, deleting a four-week geriatric medicine rotation and continuing her in family medicine, was procedurally unfair.

The Divisional Court dismissed the application, finding that the schedule change was a substantive academic decision within the university's discretion, made to better support the struggling student and ensure patient safety.

The court found no procedural unfairness or legitimate expectation that the schedule would not change.