• Context: EDC's application under section 41 of the ATIA to set aside the Information Commissioner's order for disclosure of certain redacted information??.

Core Issues

1. Information Request: EDC received a request for details of financial assistance over $50,000 to Canadian companies in Honduras from 2009 to 2019??.
2. Disclosure Dispute: The dispute centered on whether EDC must disclose policy numbers and maximum liability amounts, with the Information Commissioner ruling against EDC's exemption claims??.

Legal Considerations

1. Exemption Under ATIA and EDA: The court examined if the redacted information was exempt under ATIA subsection 24(1) and EDA subsection 24.3(1), focusing on EDC's claim that all customer-related information it obtained was exempt??.
2. Nature of Redacted Information: The court determined that the redacted information, being internally created by EDC (like policy numbers and liability figures), was not "obtained by" EDC from customers and thus not covered under the exemption??.
3. Discretion Under ATIA Subsection 18.1(1)(b): The court also considered EDC's discretion in non-disclosure under this subsection, guided by modern statutory interpretation principles??.
4. Criteria for Exemption: Four criteria were evaluated for exemption: nature of the information, its confidentiality, whether it was supplied by a third party, and consistent confidential treatment by the third party??.

Outcome

The court's decision emphasized the importance of statutory interpretation in determining the applicability of ATIA exemptions to the information held by EDC.