A building fire did not excuse Transport Canada’s earlier failure to gather records about Toronto Pearson airport, the federal information commissioner found when ordering a complete response to an access request.
In Transport Canada (Re), 2026 OIC 35, dated March 24, 2026, the Information Commissioner of Canada found the department had missed its statutory response deadline. The report also rejected a separate allegation that Transport Canada had mishandled the request before opening the file.
The order required a complete response within 120 business days after the report. Transport Canada had said it would instead provide an interim response within 120 days, without giving reasons for not implementing the full order. Those are different commitments, and the report does not establish what subsequently happened.
The records concerned airport operations and complaints
The request sought correspondence concerning the Greater Toronto Airports Authority in four areas: noise and health inquiries, changes to flight paths and operating hours, a passenger-based formula, and redesign or expansion of airspace or operational zones around Pearson.
Transport Canada received the request on June 4, 2025. It neither transferred it nor validly extended the response period, leaving a July 4 deadline under the Access to Information Act. No response arrived by then, resulting in a deemed refusal of access.
The access office initiated retrieval on June 5 and tasked four offices. Three responded by June 13. The main office, Ontario Region, had not supplied records by the investigation stage described in the report and estimated approximately 10,000 responsive pages in paper and electronic form.
Without those records, the access office could not adequately assess consultations or the work required to complete the response. The commissioner found that opportunities to provide more detailed processing information had not produced a sufficient explanation.
Electronic files could have been processed
The fire occurred on December 29, 2025, more than six months after Ontario Region was asked to retrieve the records. It prevented access to paper files in the affected building, but the commissioner found that timely retrieval would have avoided that obstacle for this request.
The report also noted that electronic records were not being processed while paper access was unavailable, even though the fire had not prevented access to the electronic files. Some were already with the access office; most had not yet been retrieved by the regional office.
The commissioner described timely access as a departmental responsibility rather than the access unit’s task alone. Alongside the response order, she recommended information-management training, procedures requiring offices to provide records promptly and performance indicators to hold officials accountable for delays.
The 120-business-day limit reflected the volume, complexity, outstanding work and time already elapsed. It was an order to finish responding, not a direction to release every requested document without considering applicable exemptions.
The initial clarification was reasonable
The requester also objected that Transport Canada initially treated the request as one for the airport authority’s own records and suggested approaching the authority directly.
The commissioner found that the original wording did not mention Transport Canada and included records that would not necessarily involve federal employees. The department sought clarification the same day, then proceeded once the requester confirmed the intended recipient and revised the wording. In those circumstances, its attempt to assist was reasonable.
Following the March 4 initial report, Transport Canada said on March 19 that it would not implement the complete-response order and would provide an interim response instead. The commissioner reminded the minister that an institution wishing not to fully implement an order must apply for Federal Court review.
The final report provided 35 business days for a review application and said the order would take effect on the 36th business day if none was filed. It does not determine whether a later court application was brought, whether the ordered response was supplied or whether any airport operation was unlawful.
