Canada Case Law

CB v. Canadian Security Intelligence Service

Court

Canadian Human Rights Tribunal

Applying the Sierra Club test and s.52 CHRA, the Tribunal found a real and substantial risk to public security from revealing the identities of CSIS employees engaged in covert operational activities under s.18(1) CSIS Act; the requested blanket anonymization of all past and present CSIS employees was overly broad, so the Tribunal granted a confidentiality/anonymization order limited to employees who were, are or are likely to become engaged in covert operational activities and imposed conditions for limited disclosure to the Complainant or Commission with confidentiality obligations.

Source excerpt

• Confidentiality orders
• Open court principle
• Anonymization of witnesses
• Csis act s.18
• Sierra club test
• S.52 chra

Read case analysis

AB v. Canadian Security Intelligence Service

Court

Canadian Human Rights Tribunal

Applying the Sierra Club/Sherman Estate framework, the Tribunal found that disclosure of identities covered by s.18(1) posed a serious risk to national security, that anonymization by pseudonym/consistent random initials and position titles was necessary and the least intrusive means, and that confidentiality in limited form (including confidential disclosure of full names to counsel or the Commission where necessary) is proportionate; accordingly a s.52 CHRA confidentiality order was granted limited to employees engaged in covert operational activities, including the Complainant.

Source excerpt

• Confidentiality orders
• Open court principle
• Anonymization of identities
• Section 18 csis act
• Sierra club test

Read case analysis

Rémillard v. Canada (National Revenue)

Court

Federal Court

The Federal Court partly granted Lucien Rémillard’s confidentiality motion, redacting standard personal identifiers but refusing broader secrecy over financial and third-party information.

• Confidentiality orders
• Publication bans
• Disclosure of tax information (s.241 ita)
• Sierra club test
• Sherman decision
• Relevance and necessity of disclosure

Read case analysis

Parrish & Heimbecker, Limited - Reasons for Order dismissing motion on confidentiality

Court

Competition Tribunal

Motion dismissed because the Commissioner failed to adduce clear, convincing and cogent evidence of the required public‑interest component of the alleged specific, direct harm; applying Sierra Club principles adapted to CT Rules, the evidentiary burden was not met and the requested confidentiality (and in‑camera testimony) could not be justified.

Source excerpt

• Confidentiality orders
• Open court principle
• Witness anonymity
• Sierra club test
• Tribunal rules

Read case analysis

Donovan v. Sherman Estate

Court

Court of Appeal for Ontario

The motion judge granted the stay of this court's May 8, 2019 order because the moving parties satisfied s.65.1(2) and met the low threshold of showing a serious issue; refusal of a stay would cause irreparable harm by rendering the leave application and any subsequent appeal moot (disseminating potentially protected materials); and the balance of convenience favoured preserving the status quo. The judge declined to order redactions or re-adjudicate the original merits on a stay motion.

Source excerpt

• Stay pending appeal
• Sierra club test
• Privacy versus open court principle
• Irreparable harm (mootness)
• Balance of convenience
• Redaction feasibility

Read case analysis

Araya v. Nevsun

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court granted Nevsun’s application to seal the Mining Agreement and related affidavit material, finding commercially sensitive information outweighed open-court concerns.

• Sealing order
• Commercial confidentiality
• Open court principle
• Sierra club test
• Disclosure of fresh evidence
• Notice to third parties

Read case analysis

Seedlings Life Science Ventures, LLC v. Pfizer Canada Inc.

Court

Federal Court

Federal Court allowed an appeal from a Prothonotary and issued a draft protective order in a patent case, holding the Sierra Club test applied.

• Protective order
• Confidentiality order
• Implied undertaking rule
• Rule 151
• Open court principle
• Sierra club test

Read case analysis

Lim v. Zhu

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court granted a sealing order and ordered a costs hearing in camera, finding that confidentiality and fairness concerns satisfied the Sierra Club test.

• Sealing order
• In camera hearing
• Costs hearing
• Settlement confidentiality
• Sierra club test
• Sealing-order

Read case analysis

David Suzuki Foundation v. Canada (Health)

Court

Federal Court

The Federal Court denied Bayer CropScience’s request to seal remaining disputed material, finding no sufficient evidence of serious commercial harm and awarding costs to the applicants.

• Confidentiality orders
• Access to information
• Pest control products act
• Federal courts rules rule 151
• Federal courts rules rule 152
• Confidential test data

Read case analysis

Leonard v. The Manufactures Life Insurance Company

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court granted a sealing order in part, redacting commercially sensitive affidavit material, but refused to seal FICOM undertakings and withheld some audits as irrelevant.

• Sealing order
• Open courts principle
• Sierra club test
• Dagenais balancing
• Regulatory undertakings (ficom)
• Relevance for certification

Read case analysis