Martinez v. Canada (Communications Security Establishment)

Martinez v. Canada (Communications Security Establishment)

Court concluded searches in PSU 913 and PPU 007 were adequate and located no personal information; PPU 040 is an exempt PIB under s.18 based on s.21 and CSE reasonably exercised its discretion under s.16(2) to neither confirm nor deny existence of records, therefore the application was dismissed.

Source-derived case information.

Citation
2018 FC 1179
Parties
Applicant: Alex Martinez; Respondent: Communications Security Establishment (CSE)
Court
Federal Court
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
23 November 2018
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review Under the Privacy Act / Final Judgment
Outcome
Application dismissed. No costs awarded.
Legal Topics
Personal Information Banks, Exemptions (s.18, S.21), Neither Confirm Nor Deny (s.16(2)), Search Adequacy, Costs
Source Language
english
Privacy Law Administrative Law National Security Law Access to Information Personal Information Banks Exemptions (s.18, S.21) Neither Confirm Nor Deny (s.16(2)) Search Adequacy +1 more

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Alex Martinez

Applicant

Communications Security Establishment (CSE)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review Under the Privacy Act / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the CSE erred in informing the applicant that no personal information relating to him existed in PIB PSU 913 and PPU 007
  2. 2 Whether the CSE reasonably relied on subsection 16(2) of the Privacy Act to neither confirm nor deny the existence of personal information in PIB PPU 040

Ratio Decidendi

Court concluded searches in PSU 913 and PPU 007 were adequate and located no personal information; PPU 040 is an exempt PIB under s.18 based on s.21 and CSE reasonably exercised its discretion under s.16(2) to neither confirm nor deny existence of records, therefore the application was dismissed.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed. No costs awarded.

Orders

  • Application for judicial review dismissed.
  • No costs are awarded.