Support Centre

You have out of 5 free articles left for the month

Signup for a trial to access unlimited content.

Start Trial

Continue reading on DataGuidance with:

Free Member

Limited Articles

Create an account to continue accessing select articles, resources, and guidance notes.

Free Trial

Unlimited Access

Start your free trial to access unlimited articles, resources, guidance notes, and workspaces.

British Columbia: Supreme Court dismisses appeal regarding disclosure of personal religious records

On January 8, 2024, the Supreme Court of British Columbia issued a judgment in the Case Vabuolas v. British Columbia (Information and Privacy Commissioner) 2024 BCSC 27, addressing the disclosure of personal religious records.

Background

In particular, the Supreme Court stated that in this case, two individuals raised a request with their former congregations of Jehovah's Witnesses to access their personal information on the basis of the Personal Information Protection Act. Following the congregation's decision to deny access, the Office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner (OIPC) issued an order to produce the records for its review.

The congregation refused disclosure of the records to the OIPC and to the individuals arguing that the records include confidential ecclesiastical discussions and that such disclosure would interfere with their right to religious freedom under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (Charter).

Findings of the Supreme Court

The Supreme Court carried out a balancing of competing interests and concluded that the limit imposed by the Production Order on the right to religious freedom is justified and proportional under the Charter.

The Supreme Court clarified that the OIPC is competent to decide what, if anything, from the record should be disclosed to the individuals, noting that the OIPC delegates are subject to confidentiality obligations and that the OIPC's decision may be further submitted to judicial review. 

Outcomes

In light of the above, the Supreme Court concluded that there was no breach of the Charter and, therefore, dismissed the petition.

You can access the case here.