Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation is asking a federal judge to block public access to records about mortgage files it admits were “inadvertently” insured through Montréal-based Laurentian Bank, citing concerns about commercial harm if the documents are disclosed.In filings to Federal Court, CMHC said it would not comply with an order from Information Commissioner Caroline Maynard to release the records under the Access To Information Act. Blacklock's Reporter said the agency claimed the documents include financial and technical data that could damage its market position if made public.“The records contain financial, commercial, scientific or technical information,” CMHC lawyers wrote. “That information has substantial market value or is reasonably likely to have such value in the future.”.CMHC said it discovered the irregularity during a routine internal review of insured mortgages, but did not elaborate on how or why it mistakenly insured loans held by Laurentian Bank and its subsidiary, B2B Bank. The issue only became public after an unidentified person filed a formal access-to-information request for files involving housing loans “inadvertently insured” or sold to Laurentian.Rather than comply with the order to release the documents, CMHC filed an application asking the court to seal the records or nullify the Information Commissioner’s directive. .“There is a reasonable expectation that harm could occur,” the agency argued.No date has been set for a hearing, and CMHC has declined to comment on the case.The dispute comes as Maynard continues to criticize federal departments for increasingly using the courts to sidestep disclosure. She told MPs last year that so many institutions are fighting access orders that her office had to spend more on legal resources.“We are in a place where information is key,” said Maynard in 2023 testimony to the Commons ethics committee. “Canadians don’t trust governments. We need information to be factual, timely and provided to them.”Maynard noted she issued 157 binding disclosure orders last year. “We now have nine cases where the institution decided to challenge the order and one where they ignored it,” she told MPs.
