About: John Doe v. Ontario (Information and Privacy Commissioner)     Goto   Sponge   NotDistinct   Permalink

An Entity of Type : owl:Thing, within Data Space : dbpedia.demo.openlinksw.com associated with source document(s)
QRcode icon
http://dbpedia.demo.openlinksw.com/describe/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fdbpedia.org%2Fresource%2FJohn_Doe_v._Ontario_%28Information_and_Privacy_Commissioner%29&invfp=IFP_OFF&sas=SAME_AS_OFF

In acquitting an accused, of the Ontario Divisional Court, stated that the four police officers involved in the case had harassed the accused and that they should be charged with fabricating evidence. Matlow sought access to the report of the Ontario Provincial Police exonerating the officers under the Ontario Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (1987) but was denied access to it by the OPP. Access was later granted by the FIPPA Commissioner.

AttributesValues
rdfs:label
  • John Doe v. Ontario (Information and Privacy Commissioner) (en)
rdfs:comment
  • In acquitting an accused, of the Ontario Divisional Court, stated that the four police officers involved in the case had harassed the accused and that they should be charged with fabricating evidence. Matlow sought access to the report of the Ontario Provincial Police exonerating the officers under the Ontario Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (1987) but was denied access to it by the OPP. Access was later granted by the FIPPA Commissioner. (en)
name
  • John Doe v. Ontario (en)
dcterms:subject
Wikipage page ID
Wikipage revision ID
Link from a Wikipage to another Wikipage
sameAs
dbp:wikiPageUsesTemplate
Dissent
  • Southey (en)
majority
  • CAMPBELL and DUNNET (en)
has abstract
  • In acquitting an accused, of the Ontario Divisional Court, stated that the four police officers involved in the case had harassed the accused and that they should be charged with fabricating evidence. Matlow sought access to the report of the Ontario Provincial Police exonerating the officers under the Ontario Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (1987) but was denied access to it by the OPP. Access was later granted by the FIPPA Commissioner. The Court ruled that the FIPPA Commissioner fundamentally misconstrued the Act in finding that "the presumption in s. 21(3) of an unjustified invasion of personal privacy was subject to rebuttal by the application of a discretionary balancing process under s. 21(2)". The commissioner gave himself a power not granted by the legislation and thereby committed a jurisdictional error in his application of discretionary balancing process (which he did not have). In addition, the FIPPA Commissioner was deemed to decline jurisdiction when s/he failed to mention the results of the Police Complaints Commission investigation, which were inconvenient to the FIPPA judgment. The application for judicial review of an order of the FIPPA Commissioner by one John Doe (presumably one of the police officers) was allowed, and the publication of the OPP report was banned, in effect by section 21(3) of the FIPPA (en)
date decided
prov:wasDerivedFrom
page length (characters) of wiki page
foaf:isPrimaryTopicOf
is Link from a Wikipage to another Wikipage of
is foaf:primaryTopic of
Faceted Search & Find service v1.17_git139 as of Feb 29 2024


Alternative Linked Data Documents: ODE     Content Formats:   [cxml] [csv]     RDF   [text] [turtle] [ld+json] [rdf+json] [rdf+xml]     ODATA   [atom+xml] [odata+json]     Microdata   [microdata+json] [html]    About   
This material is Open Knowledge   W3C Semantic Web Technology [RDF Data] Valid XHTML + RDFa
OpenLink Virtuoso version 08.03.3330 as of Mar 19 2024, on Linux (x86_64-generic-linux-glibc212), Single-Server Edition (378 GB total memory, 59 GB memory in use)
Data on this page belongs to its respective rights holders.
Virtuoso Faceted Browser Copyright © 2009-2024 OpenLink Software