The court noted that the applicant in that case took issue with the disclosure he received. The court reviewed s. 27(3) of the CCRA which authorizes the Commissioner not to disclose information that would jeopardize the safety of any person, the security of a penitentiary or the conduct of any lawful investigation. The court noted that officials are to provide a gist of the information which is to provide as much information as possible. At para[14], the court reviewed Cartier v. Canada (Attorney General) 1998 CarswellNat 2976 where Nadon J. wrote as follows: ... Not so in the case of a decision to transfer made for the sake of the orderly and proper administration of the institution and based on a belief that the inmate should, because of concerns raised as to his behaviour, not remain where he is. In such a case, there would be no basis for requiring that the inmate be given as many particulars of all the wrongdoings of which he may be suspected. Indeed, in the former case, what has to be verified is the very commission of the offence and the person involved should be given the fullest opportunity to convince of his innocence; in the latter case, it is merely the reasonableness and the seriousness of the belief on which the decision would be based and the participation of the person involved has to be rendered meaningful for that but nothing more. ...
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.