|
|
 |
| s.4 |
SUMMARY OF ORDERS/PRIVACY REPORTS |
s.4 |
s.4(1)
-
Factors to be considered for control
Findings: Additional factors which may be relevant to whether or not an institution has control over a record are:
1. What use did the the creator of the record intended to make of it? 2. Does the institution have the authority to regulate the record's use? 3. Does the institution have the authority to dispose of the record? 4. Has an outside contractor refused to provide the institution with a copy of the record and, if so, to what extent, if any, should this determine the control issue? 5. To what extent, if any, does the return of the record to the outside entity by the institution determine the control issue? 6. What undertakings of confidentiality were given by the outside contractor?
(Order # MO-1289) (Order #MO-1289)
-
Records that are in the Custody or Under the Control of the Institution
In this case, referring to section 69 of the Municipal Act, the adjudicator determined the mayor was an officer of the institution and as such the mayor's records were in the custody or under the control of the institution for the purposes of this appeal. (Order# MO-1403). Notwithstanding previous orders M-813, and M-846 which found that councillors are not generally considered to be officers, and with reference to the "Elected Officials Records Policy" of the municipality which distinguished "Personal Papers" from "Official Civic Records", the adjudicator determined that some responsive records may be in the possession of City Councillors. The adjudicator ordered the City to obtain from City Councillors the responsive records in their possession that, based on the adjudicator's analysis, are in the City's custody or control and prepare a decision letter with respect to access to the records. (Order# MO-1403)
|
|
OCIPO 