Disposition Categories

DISPOSITION CATEGORIES (as of April 1^st, 2010) (Modified March 29, 2012)

1) well founded

The Office of the Information Commissioner (OIC) found evidence of the complainant’s rights being denied under the Access to Information Act.

It was necessary for the OIC to report the finding of the investigation to the head of the institution and provide recommendations, where appropriate (section 37 of the Act).

well founded, resolved without recommendations

The institution took remedial action to the satisfaction of the OIC during the course of the investigation. The OIC did not need to provide a recommendation to the head of the institution

well founded with recommendations – resolved

If the head of the institution accepted the OIC recommendations and remedial action was taken by the institution to the satisfaction of the OIC, the matter is considered resolved and no further action by the OIC is necessary.

well founded with recommendations – not resolved

If the head of the institution did not accept the recommendations of the OIC, or if the remedial action was not to the satisfaction of the OIC, the complainant will be informed that the matter is not resolved and the complainant, or the OIC with the complainant’s consent, can pursue the matter in Court where the matter relates to a refusal.

2) not well founded

As a result of the investigation, the OIC found that the institution applied the Access to Information Act correctly.

3) discontinued

The complaint was withdrawn or abandoned by the complainant before allegations were fully investigated. In some cases, the complainant did not respond to the OIC’s request for representations within a reasonable time period, or cannot be located.

4) settled

The complaint was settled to the satisfaction of all parties without the need for the OIC to make a finding.

Skip to Content

Home

About Us

Legal Corner

Investigations

Parliamentary Activities

Reports and Publications

Media Room

Reading Room

The Right To Know Movement

Proactive Disclosure

Links

RSS Feeds

Disposition Categories

Home About Us Who we are What we do Our structure The Commissioner Corporate information Commissioner ad hoc Career Opportunities Legal Corner About the legislation Access to Information Act Your right to information under the Act Court Cases Investigations Notable investigation summaries Systemic Investigations Investigators Guide to Interpreting the ATIA Disposition Categories Practice Directions Parliamentary Activities Appearances before Parliamentary Committees Access to Information Act Reform Benchmarking Other documents Reports and Publications Annual Reports Special reports to Parliament RPP and DPR Reports Statistical Reports Other reports of interest Media Room News Releases Speeches Reading Room ATIA requests Consultations Other documents of interest The Right To Know Movement Its history Canada’s Right to Know Week Proactive Disclosure Travel expenses Hospitality expenses Contracts over $10,000 Position reclassifications Proactive Disclosure of Grants and Contributions over $25,000 Report on Annual Expenditures for Travel, Hospitality and Conferences Public Opinion Research Advertising Links RSS Feeds	Disposition Categories DISPOSITION CATEGORIES (as of April 1^st, 2010) (Modified March 29, 2012) 1) well founded The Office of the Information Commissioner (OIC) found evidence of the complainant’s rights being denied under the Access to Information Act. It was necessary for the OIC to report the finding of the investigation to the head of the institution and provide recommendations, where appropriate (section 37 of the Act). well founded, resolved without recommendations The institution took remedial action to the satisfaction of the OIC during the course of the investigation. The OIC did not need to provide a recommendation to the head of the institution well founded with recommendations – resolved If the head of the institution accepted the OIC recommendations and remedial action was taken by the institution to the satisfaction of the OIC, the matter is considered resolved and no further action by the OIC is necessary. well founded with recommendations – not resolved If the head of the institution did not accept the recommendations of the OIC, or if the remedial action was not to the satisfaction of the OIC, the complainant will be informed that the matter is not resolved and the complainant, or the OIC with the complainant’s consent, can pursue the matter in Court where the matter relates to a refusal. 2) not well founded As a result of the investigation, the OIC found that the institution applied the Access to Information Act correctly. 3) discontinued The complaint was withdrawn or abandoned by the complainant before allegations were fully investigated. In some cases, the complainant did not respond to the OIC’s request for representations within a reasonable time period, or cannot be located. 4) settled The complaint was settled to the satisfaction of all parties without the need for the OIC to make a finding.