Right to Life Association of Toronto and Area v. Metropolitan Toronto District Health Council et al., (1991) 53 O.A.C. 231 (DC)

• Judge: Callaghan, C.J.O.C., O'Brien and Rosenberg, JJ.
• Court: Ontario Court of Justice General Division (Canada)
• Case Date: December 04, 1991
• Jurisdiction: Ontario
• Citations: (1991), 53 O.A.C. 231 (DC)

Right to Life Assoc. v. Health Council (1991), 53 O.A.C. 231 (DC)

MLB headnote and full text

Right to Life Association of Toronto and Area (applicant) v. Metropolitan Toronto District Health Council and Information and Privacy Commissioner/Ontario (respondents)

(No. 524/90)

Indexed As: Right to Life Association of Toronto and Area v. Metropolitan Toronto District Health Council et al.

Ontario Court of Justice

General Division

Divisional Court

Callaghan, C.J.O.C., O'Brien and Rosenberg, JJ.

December 4, 1991.

Summary:

The Right to Life Association (R.L.A.) requested access to a report to the Metro­politan Toronto District Health Council respecting establishment of a community health centre. The request was denied under the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act on the ground that the record contained personal and confidential informa­tion. The Information and Privacy Commis­sioner refused to order disclosure of the names of the persons proposing the health centre, but did order disclosure of the sub­stantive portions of the report. The R.L.A. applied for judicial review of the Commis­sioner's decision, submitting that he erred in finding the names of the individuals to be "personal information" under s. 2(1) of the Act.

The Ontario Divisional Court dismissed the application.

Crown - Topic 7206

Examination of public documents - Free­dom of information - Bars - Personal information - The Right to Life Associ­ation sought access to the names of per­sons proposing the establishment of a Women's Community Health Care Centre - The Ontario Divisional Court agreed that the names of the persons was "personal information" under s. 2(1) of the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act and was, accordingly, not to be dis­closed under s. 21(1) - The court stated that it was a reasonable interpretation of s. 2(1) that disclosure of names would reveal other personal information about the indi­viduals (s. 2(1)(h)).

Cases Noticed:

Service Employees' International Union, Local No. 333 v. Nipawin District Staff Nurses Association, [1975] 1 S.C.R. 382, refd to. [para. 9].

Statutes Noticed:

Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act, S.O. 1987, c. 25, sect. 2(1)(e), sect. 2(1)(h), sect. 21(1) [para. 10]; sect. 23 [para. 13].

Counsel:

Angela M. Costigan and T. McCarthy, for the applicant;

Donald J.M. Brown, Q.C., and D.S. Goodis, for the respondent, Information and Privacy Commissioner;

Pamela A. Chapman and David R. Wright, for the intervenor, Jane Doe;

Leslie M. MacIntosh, for the Attorney General of Ontario.

This application was heard on October 23, 1991, before Callaghan, C.J.O.C., O'Brien and Rosenberg, JJ., of the Ontario Divisional Court.

The judgment of the Divisional Court was delivered orally by Callaghan, C.J.O.C., and released on December 4, 1991.