Canada Case Law

Canada (Commissioner of Competition) v Rogers Communications Inc. - 2026 Comp Trib 16 - Order - CT-2024-012

Court

Competition Tribunal

The Tribunal concluded that the Confidentiality Order from the prior proceeding continues to apply to the TELUS records compelled under the Federal Court s.11 order and that the two specific documents subpoenaed from TELUS should be treated identically; accordingly the TELUS records listed in the joint exhaustive list and the two subpoenaed documents are designated Confidential - Level A and remain subject to the prior confidentiality protections.

Source excerpt

• Confidentiality
• Third‑party records
• Subpoena
• Conduct review (s.74.1)
• Production under s.11

Read case analysis

R. v. Wiwchar

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court dismissed a s. 8 Charter challenge to police confirmation from Public Storage that the accused rented a locker, finding no reasonable expectation of privacy.

• Section 8 charter
• Reasonable expectation of privacy
• Informational privacy
• Search warrants and production orders
• Third‑party records
• Section-8-charter

Read case analysis

Rogers - Reasons for Order and Order on a motion for additional production

Court

Competition Tribunal

The Tribunal denied production of the Commissioner’s Unlimited Plan Records because the timing and internal rationale of the Commissioner’s investigative steps and decisions to pursue or not pursue other providers are not relevant to the matters in issue; the Tribunal granted production in part of Third-Party Records because marketing plans, reports, research, competitive assessments, assessments of competitive impact and complaint-related communications from Bell, Telus and other third parties are relevant to consumer understanding and the Commissioner’s pleading of aggravating factors, and…

Source excerpt

• Misleading advertising
• Discovery and production
• Proportionality of disclosure
• Section 11 production orders
• Third-party records

Read case analysis

R. v. Wiwchar

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court dismissed Dean Michael Wiwchar’s O’Connor application for third-party records, finding no likely relevance and no basis to proceed to Stage 2.

• Third‑party records
• O'connor application
• Prior consistent statements
• Abuse of process
• Disclosure obligations
• Third-party-records

Read case analysis

Joda v. Bell

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court held the plaintiff need not obtain third-party medical records herself; she must provide authorizations so defendants can request them and pay the suppliers.

• Production of documents
• Medical records
• Care and control
• Third-party records
• Costs of production
• Jurisdictional limits

Read case analysis

R v. Ilunga

Court

Court of Appeal for Ontario

Appeal dismissed: on the record the trial judge did not reverse the burden of proof and provided reasons sufficient for appellate review when read as a whole; fresh evidence did not establish that trial counsel’s performance was incompetent to the extent of causing prejudice or undermining verdict reliability, and the appellant did not establish entitlement to a new trial.

Source excerpt

• Sexual assault
• Burden of proof
• Reasonable doubt
• Sufficiency of reasons
• Ineffective assistance of counsel
• Fresh evidence

Read case analysis

Harper v. Sheppard

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court limited third-party and medical disclosure to periods the plaintiff consented to, finding no evidentiary basis for broader pre-accident records.

• Pre-accident records
• Third-party records
• Relevance
• Proportionality
• Costs
• Pre-accident-records

Read case analysis

R. v. Bryfogle

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court denied an appeal-stage disclosure application in a breach of probation appeal, finding most requests irrelevant and refusing to order Holland investigation records before the appeal was heard.

• Disclosure
• Breach of probation
• Contempt
• Third-party records
• Stinchcombe
• O'connor

Read case analysis

R. v. Googoo

Court

Nova Scotia Provincial Court

Applicant failed to meet the s.278.5(1)(b) likely relevance threshold because he relied on prohibited general assertions and provided no case-specific evidence that the therapeutic records or the supplemental document would provide added information or impeachment value not already available; on balancing interests production was not necessary in the interests of justice given the high privacy expectations in counselling records and the prejudicial effect of disclosure; the supplemental document is a third-party record subject to s.278 protections and there was no informed waiver, therefore b…

Source excerpt

• Third-party records
• S.278.3 criminal code
• Therapeutic records
• Likely relevance
• Production of records
• Waiver

Read case analysis

R v. A.B.

Court

Nova Scotia Provincial Court

The applicant failed to adduce case‑specific evidence that the guidance counsellor created records that are likely relevant to an issue at trial or witness competence; the application was speculative, immediate police involvement made added probative value unlikely, and the complainant's privacy interest outweighed any minimal probative value — accordingly threshold disclosure under s.278.5 was not met and the application is dismissed.

Source excerpt

• Third‑party records
• S.278 criminal code regime
• Disclosure obligations
• Publication ban
• Credibility impeachment
• Likely relevance test

Read case analysis