PMG Technologies Inc. v. Canada (Transport)

PMG Technologies Inc. v. Canada (Transport)

The Court concluded that, on the face of most disputed communications and given their creation dates and content, the dominant purpose was litigation preparation and the communications are protected by litigation privilege and common interest privilege; specific excerpts were identified as privileged or not in the reasons, and an internal memo prepared for litigation was protected; therefore the application is allowed in part and disclosure limited accordingly.

Citation
2018 FC 344
Parties
Applicant: PMG Technologies Inc.; Respondent: Transport Canada
Court
Federal Court
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
28 March 2018
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review (access to Information Act) / Federal Court Judgment (reasons)
Outcome
Application allowed in part; litigation privilege and common interest privilege upheld for specified documents and excerpts; other portions ordered disclosed; costs awarded to applicant.
Legal Topics
Solicitor Client Privilege, Litigation Privilege, Common Interest Privilege, Disclosure Obligations, Costs
Source Language
English
Access to Information Act Administrative Law Evidence Privilege Civil Procedure Solicitor Client Privilege Litigation Privilege Common Interest 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 6 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

PMG Technologies Inc.

Applicant

Transport Canada

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review (access to Information Act) / Federal Court Judgment (reasons)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Documents are protected by litigation privilege
  2. 2 Whether the dominant purpose of each document was preparation for litigation
  3. 3 Whether common interest privilege applies and whether privilege was waived by disclosure to Transport Canada

Ratio Decidendi

The Court concluded that, on the face of most disputed communications and given their creation dates and content, the dominant purpose was litigation preparation and the communications are protected by litigation privilege and common interest privilege; specific excerpts were identified as privileged or not in the reasons, and an internal memo prepared for litigation was protected; therefore the application is allowed in part and disclosure limited accordingly.

Court Disposition

Application allowed in part; litigation privilege and common interest privilege upheld for specified documents and excerpts; other portions ordered disclosed; costs awarded to applicant.

Orders

  • Applicant’s claims of litigation privilege confirmed or dismissed as set out in the reasons dated March 28, 2018
  • Respondent to withhold privileged portions and disclose non-privileged portions of the Documents in accordance with the Court’s reasons