Chopra v. Health Canada

Chopra v. Health Canada

The Tribunal held that documents in Dr. Bailliu's possession that relate directly to her September 14, 2006 medical certificate (her current CV, Dr. Lachance's medical record in her possession as it relates to that certificate, her notes/correspondence regarding the assessment, and invoices/compensation documents relating to preparing the certificate) are arguably relevant and must be disclosed subject to solicitor‑client and litigation privilege; other requested documents and particulars were not arguably relevant and disclosure was denied, and the Complainant may test and challenge Dr. Bailliu's evidence through cross‑examination if she is called.

Citation
2007 CHRT 10
Parties
Complainant: Shiv Chopra; Commission: Canadian Human Rights Commission; Respondent: Health Canada
Court
Canadian Human Rights Tribunal
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
13 April 2007
Procedural Posture
Human Rights Complaint / Pre‑hearing Disclosure Motion / Ruling
Outcome
Partial disclosure ordered; other requests denied as not arguably relevant; confidentiality and return obligations imposed
Legal Topics
Disclosure, Witness Testimony, Medical Records, Privilege, Particulars
Source Language
English
Administrative Law Human Rights Law Evidence Privacy and Confidentiality Disclosure Witness Testimony Medical Records Privilege +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 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Shiv Chopra

Complainant

Canadian Human Rights Commission

Commission

Health Canada

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Human Rights Complaint / Pre‑hearing Disclosure Motion / Ruling

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether documents requested by the Complainant are arguably relevant to the testimony of Dr. Bailliu
  2. 2 Scope of disclosure where a third party medical certificate will be tendered
  3. 3 Application of solicitor‑client and litigation privilege to requested documents

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal held that documents in Dr. Bailliu's possession that relate directly to her September 14, 2006 medical certificate (her current CV, Dr. Lachance's medical record in her possession as it relates to that certificate, her notes/correspondence regarding the assessment, and invoices/compensation documents relating to preparing the certificate) are arguably relevant and must be disclosed subject to solicitor‑client and litigation privilege; other requested documents and particulars were not arguably relevant and disclosure was denied, and the Complainant may test and challenge Dr. Bailliu's evidence through cross‑examination if she is called.

Court Disposition

Partial disclosure ordered; other requests denied as not arguably relevant; confidentiality and return obligations imposed

Orders

  • Respondent to disclose Dr. Bailliu's current curriculum vitae relating to the September 14, 2006 certificate
  • Respondent to disclose Dr. Lachance's medical record in the possession of Dr. Bailliu insofar as it relates to the medical condition referred to in the September 14, 2006 certificate