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

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

The motion was dismissed because Bell's request was overbroad and not sufficiently related to the dispute under the relevance standard, sought documents from third parties beyond the Tribunal's jurisdiction, would require creation of non-existent documents, and the information Bell sought could be adequately tested through cross-examination and rebuttal expert evidence rather than wholesale production of private financial records.

Citation
2005 CHRT 34
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
15 September 2005
Procedural Posture
Human Rights Pay Equity / Ruling on Disclosure Motion (pre Trial)
Outcome
Motion dismissed.
Legal Topics
Pay Equity, Remedy Pain and Suffering, Disclosure, Production of Documents, Relevance, Privacy of Financial Records, Expert Evidence, Interest Rate
Source Language
English
Human Rights Employment Law Privacy Procedural Law Evidence Pay Equity Remedy Pain and Suffering Disclosure +5 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 4 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
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

Human Rights Pay Equity / Ruling on Disclosure Motion (pre Trial)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Bell Canada is entitled to production of detailed historical financial records of proposed complainant witnesses and their spouses/partners
  2. 2 Whether the Tribunal has jurisdiction to order third parties to produce documents
  3. 3 Whether a party can be required to create documents that do not exist

Ratio Decidendi

The motion was dismissed because Bell's request was overbroad and not sufficiently related to the dispute under the relevance standard, sought documents from third parties beyond the Tribunal's jurisdiction, would require creation of non-existent documents, and the information Bell sought could be adequately tested through cross-examination and rebuttal expert evidence rather than wholesale production of private financial records.

Court Disposition

Motion dismissed.

Orders

  • Bell Canada's motion for disclosure/production of financial documents is dismissed.
  • No order will be made compelling spouses or partners to produce documents.