Hydro-Québec v. Canada ( National Energy Board )
T-2109-96
Morneau P.
23/4/97
11 pp.
Question whether National Energy Board decision made pursuant to Access to Information Act and, if so, whether process followed by Board in making decision such as would allow applicant Hydro-Québec to bring application for judicial review of decision under Act, s. 44-In decision, Board telling Hydro-Québec it intended to give requester copy of contract for sale of electricity between Hydro-Québec and American purchaser, which contract applicant considered confidential (diversity contract)-On December 7, 1994, Board granting Hydro-Québec two permits relating to contracts latter had to sign-On September 4, 1996, Board sent letter to Hydro-Québec informing it of decision to disclose diversity contract-On September 23, 1996, Hydro-Québec filing notice of motion seeking to have Board's decision reviewed pursuant to Act, s. 44-Grand Council of Crees (of Quebec), Cree Regional Authority and Mouvement au Courant (MAC) asking Court to decide whether Board's decision rendered pursuant to Access to Information Act and whether decision reviewable by Court-In January 1996, MAC had requested copy of diversity contract to be filed with Board-On day after MAC's request, Board did not have diversity contract MAC seeking in its possession, nor did it know what position Hydro-Québec would take in respect of MAC's request-Board's decision not, and not required to be, made pursuant to enabling statute-Entirely proper for Board to want to deal with access request under Access to Information Act, since its enabling statute not authorizing it to respond to request for records outside context of hearings pending before it-Board cannot be criticized for proceeding under Act, as under provisions of its enabling statute, Board court of record and government institution-By deciding to deal with MAC's request dated January 16, 1996, Board not deliberately attempting to avoid interpreting contract-Board undeniably reached decision pursuant to Act-Despite various deficiencies for which Board responsible, both Board and Hydro-Québec complied with substance and objective of consultation process provided for in Act, ss. 27, 28, 44-Board's decision not made outside substantive framework of Act and Hydro-Québec in position to proceed under Act, s. 44 to have decision reviewed-Preliminary question must be answered in affirmative-Access to Information Act, R.S.C., 1985, c. A-1, ss. 27, 28, 44.