[2017] 2 F.C.R. D-7
Practice
Confidentiality Orders
Motion by respondent for order of confidentiality pursuant to Federal Courts Rules, SOR/98-106, r. 151 to permit respondent to file with Court copy of unredacted records at issue in underlying application for judicial review, restricting applicant’s counsel from accessing unredacted records even upon execution of written undertaking pursuant to r. 152(2)(b) — Applicant seeking order to have access to unredacted records at issue — Underlying application involving consolidated applications for judicial review brought pursuant to Access to Information Act, R.S.C., 1985, c. A-1 (ATIA), s. 41 in relation to requests by applicant to Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) for information, documentation provided by third parties to CRA in course of audit of applicant under Income Tax Act, R.S.C., 1985 (5th Supp.), c. 1 (ITA), Excise Tax Act, R.S.C., 1985, c. E-14 — Applicant filing notices of objection with CRA in relation to notices of reassessment — Applicant’s former accountant providing information, documentation to CRA during audit — Applicant delivering to CRA requests for records under ATIA to obtain information, answers, documents provided to CRA during course of audit — In response, CRA providing applicant with records redacted pursuant to several exemption provisions of ATIA, including ATIA, s. 24(1) — Whether respondent’s request for confidentiality order allowing for unredacted records to be filed with Court should be granted; if so, whether Court should restrict access to confidential material such that applicant’s counsel would not be permitted access to unredacted records even upon execution of written undertaking — Confidentiality order issued — R. 152 ensuring proper balance between openness, confidentiality — In determining whether to permit applicant’s counsel access to confidential information at issue, general question to ask is what information is needed by counsel to permit intelligent debate on question of its disclosure; specifically, does counsel need unredacted records themselves or is summary or general description of nature of confidential information sufficient — ITA, s. 241 not clearly, unambiguously providing that disclosure of taxpayer information may not be made by Court to counsel for applicant — Not constituting complete prohibition on disclosure of unredacted records to counsel for applicant — Court therefore obligated to engage in exercise articulated in Hunter v. Canada (Consumer and Corporate Affairs), [1991] 3 F.C. 186 to determine information needed by counsel for applicant to permit intelligent debate on question of its disclosure — Applicant improperly conflating arguments to be made to resist CRA’s reassessments of applicant in notice of objection proceedings with arguments to be made by applicant on application for judicial review — Court not satisfied applicant meeting obligation to provide explanation as to why disclosure of unredacted records necessary — Counsel for applicant not requiring access to unredacted records — Description of nature of records, redacted information sufficient — Motion granted.
Bradwick Property Management Services Inc. v. Canada (National Revenue) (T-2161-15, 2016 FC 1056, Aylen P., order dated September 19, 2016, 29 pp.)