Communications, Energy and Paperworkers Union of Canada v. Bell Canada

Communications, Energy and Paperworkers Union of Canada v. Bell Canada

The Tribunal held that Bell failed to meet the tests for litigation and settlement privilege for the contested documents because they were prepared to analyze wage gaps and inform collective bargaining rather than dominantly for litigation or settlement; collective bargaining privilege was not established for the majority of documents under Wigmore, except for internal memorandum 1484; CEP's three mediation-era notes (documents 21, 53, 83) were privileged.

Citation
2003 CHRT 19
Parties
Complainant: Communications, Energy and Paperworkers Union of Canada; Complainant: Femmes-Action; Commission: Canadian Human Rights Commission; Respondent: Bell Canada
Court
Canadian Human Rights Tribunal
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
28 May 2003
Procedural Posture
Administrative Human Rights Tribunal Proceeding / Ruling on Privilege/discovery (motion for Production)
Outcome
Partial: most privilege claims denied and production ordered; narrow privileges upheld (Bell document 1484 and CEP documents 21, 53, 83); Tribunal ratified parties' agreement (Exhibit T-5) governing production of certain wage-gap materials.
Legal Topics
Litigation Privilege, Settlement Privilege, Collective Bargaining Privilege, Discovery/production, Pay Equity
Source Language
English
Human Rights Law Labour Law Employment Law Administrative Law Evidence Law Litigation Privilege Settlement Privilege Collective Bargaining Privilege +2 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Communications, Energy and Paperworkers Union of Canada

Complainant

Femmes-Action

Complainant

Canadian Human Rights Commission

Commission

Bell Canada

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Administrative Human Rights Tribunal Proceeding / Ruling on Privilege/discovery (motion for Production)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Bell's claimed litigation privilege attaches to specified Joint Study documents
  2. 2 Whether Bell's claimed settlement privilege attaches to specified documents
  3. 3 Whether collective bargaining privilege exists and applies to specified documents under Wigmore criteria

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal held that Bell failed to meet the tests for litigation and settlement privilege for the contested documents because they were prepared to analyze wage gaps and inform collective bargaining rather than dominantly for litigation or settlement; collective bargaining privilege was not established for the majority of documents under Wigmore, except for internal memorandum 1484; CEP's three mediation-era notes (documents 21, 53, 83) were privileged.

Court Disposition

Partial: most privilege claims denied and production ordered; narrow privileges upheld (Bell document 1484 and CEP documents 21, 53, 83); Tribunal ratified parties' agreement (Exhibit T-5) governing production of certain wage-gap materials.

Orders

  • Bell to disclose and produce Joint Study documents except those for which privilege upheld
  • Bell permitted to withhold document 1484 (collective bargaining privilege upheld)