Canada Case Law

Hoyle v. Scouts Canada

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

Court held that disclosure should be ordered in a tiered, protective manner: source documents and the confidential list must be produced with the complainant's name and address/contact information redacted, but dates and particulars of the complaint are to be unredacted; the Wigmore test was not fully satisfied on the evidence and privacy interests are balanced by targeted redactions; order without prejudice to further disclosure applications on additional evidence.

Source excerpt

• Wigmore test
• Class privilege
• Discovery and disclosure
• Redaction
• Open court principle
• Similar fact evidence

Read case analysis

R. v. Gosal

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court granted the media applications in part: Exhibit 1 (admissions of fact) may be copied and published but Appendix A (medical records) is excluded; specified narrow extracts of the Starbucks/Pacific Centre CCTV footage in Exhibit 2 may be viewed, copied and published by CTV only after pixelating/blurring all faces other than the deceased and the accused and pixelating badge numbers; other videos in Exhibit 2 may be viewed but not copied or published. This tailored editing is necessary and proportionate to protect privacy, dignity, witness safety and police safety while preserving the o…

Source excerpt

• Open court principle
• Publication/access to exhibits
• Privacy and human dignity
• Publication restrictions
• Third-party privacy
• Doxing

Read case analysis

R. v. Bernier

Court

Court of Appeal for Ontario

The Ontario Court of Appeal dismissed this appeal as moot after the appellant pleaded guilty and was convicted. It also denied his request for a publication ban.

• Writ of certiorari
• Guilty plea waiver of interlocutory appeals
• Mootness
• Publication ban
• Open court principle
• Publication-ban

Read case analysis

A.B. v. C.D.

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court found the formal chambers application was necessary because previously published reasons existed and the request sought modification of published judgments; affidavit evidence for the stand-alone Rule 10-3 application was admissible (post-trial material need not be struck and hearsay may be used to show statements were made but not for truth); applying the Sherman Estate balancing test the court concluded there is a serious risk to the identified public interest (children's health, privacy and safety) if actual initials remain, and granted further anonymization ordering that all pre…

Source excerpt

• Anonymization
• Open court principle
• Hearsay on chambers applications
• Judicial discretion
• Sealing and publication orders

Read case analysis

Almrei v. Canada (Attorney General)

Court

Federal Court

The Federal Court confirmed non-disclosure of redacted portions of Justice Mosley’s 2024 judgment, but approved limited summaries for disclosure.

• Disclosure
• Public interest balancing
• Csis human source privilege (s 18.1)
• Canada evidence act s 38/s 38.06
• Redaction and summaries
• Mosaic effect

Read case analysis

A.B. v. The Nova Scotia Health Authority

Court

Supreme Court of Nova Scotia

The applicant satisfied the three‑part Sierra Club/Sherman Estate test: the MAID‑related medical information is sufficiently sensitive to implicate core dignity and privacy interests (important public interest); a publication ban and use of initials were necessary because the information was not public and modern dissemination risks made alternatives inadequate; and the limited measures sought were proportionate because they preserve public access to the legal issues while protecting the applicant’s identity. The motion is granted accordingly.

Source excerpt

• Medical assistance in dying
• Publication ban
• Open court principle
• Privacy and dignity
• Civil procedure rule 85.04

Read case analysis

Law Society of Ontario v. AA

Court

Court of Appeal for Ontario

The Court of Appeal allowed the Law Society’s appeal, found the good character decision and licensing condition unreasonable, and remitted the matter for reconsideration.

• Good character
• Licensing
• Judicial review
• Anonymization
• Publication ban
• Open court principle

Read case analysis

Canada (Attorney General) v. El Didi

Court

Federal Court

The Federal Court confirmed confidentiality for emails about appointing an amicus curiae in CEA section 38 applications, applying the Sherman Estate test and refusing journalist access.

• Open court principle
• Canada evidence act s.38
• Amicus curiae appointment
• Confidentiality orders
• Publication bans
• Sherman estate test

Read case analysis

S.L.K. v. A.B.

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court granted the defendant anonymity and a sealing order pending trial, finding publicity would seriously harm his reputation, dignity, and well-being.

• Open court principle
• Anonymization
• Publication ban
• Sealing orders
• Protection of reputation
• Public safety

Read case analysis

Chan v. British Columbia (Workers’ Compensation Appeal Tribunal)

Court

British Columbia Court of Appeal

The Court of Appeal quashed parts of two interlocutory appeals, refused sealing and no-fee relief, and ordered $10,000 security for costs of the appeals.

• Sealing orders
• Security for costs
• Jurisdiction to appeal
• Costs awards
• Anonymity orders
• Open court principle

Read case analysis