Montreuil v. Canadian Forces

Montreuil v. Canadian Forces

The Tribunal denied the Commission's motion because the Respondent established a plausible argument that the requested documents are arguably privileged under Quebec law and that privilege has not been waived by production of the expert's final report; therefore disclosure is not ordered at the disclosure stage and the issue can be finally determined at the merits hearing based on evidence and arguments then presented.

Citation
2006 CHRT 42
Parties
Complainant: Micheline Montreuil; Commission: Canadian Human Rights Commission; Respondent: Canadian Forces
Court
Canadian Human Rights Tribunal
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
12 October 2006
Procedural Posture
Human Rights Complaint / Pre Hearing Disclosure Stage (ruling on Motion)
Outcome
Motion denied without prejudice
Legal Topics
Privilege, Professional Secrecy, Disclosure, Expert Evidence, Admissibility
Source Language
English
Human Rights Evidence Administrative Law Privacy/professional Secrecy Privilege Professional Secrecy Disclosure Expert Evidence +1 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 6 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Micheline Montreuil

Complainant

Canadian Human Rights Commission

Commission

Canadian Forces

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Human Rights Complaint / Pre Hearing Disclosure Stage (ruling on Motion)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether documents prepared by or addressing the expert are protected by privilege/professional secrecy under Quebec law
  2. 2 Whether production of an expert's final report and calling the expert waives privilege in draft notes, communications and preparatory materials
  3. 3 Which law of evidence applies (Quebec civil law or common law) for privilege issues in this Tribunal proceeding

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal denied the Commission's motion because the Respondent established a plausible argument that the requested documents are arguably privileged under Quebec law and that privilege has not been waived by production of the expert's final report; therefore disclosure is not ordered at the disclosure stage and the issue can be finally determined at the merits hearing based on evidence and arguments then presented.

Court Disposition

Motion denied without prejudice

Orders

  • The Commission's motion for an order requiring the Respondent to disclose documents asserted to be privileged is denied without prejudice to raising the issue at the merits hearing