Canada: Records Management @ Gowlings: May 16, 2012 - Volume 3, Number 5

Last Updated: May 25 2012

Edited by Louis A. Frapporti and Christopher Purdon

In this issue:

  • Legal Technology
  • News and Articles



Bull v. UPS Inc., No. 10-4339 (3d Cir. Jan. 4, 2012)

Plaintiff employee of defendant suffered injuries on the job, which she immediately reported to the defendant and requested medical attention.  Two weeks passed before she saw the company doctor who restricted her lifting.  A specialist thereafter further reduced the maximum weight she was to lift.  The defendant placed the plaintiff on light duty but at the end of the assignment plaintiff stopped working and began receiving workers' compensation.  Upon her return, the specialist put a permanent weight limit on overhead lifting but did not refer to other types of lifting.  Her supervisor advised her this made it impossible for the defendant to continue her employment and advised that she seek permanent disability.  The plaintiff sought a second opinion from another specialist who advised in a note that the plaintiff was able to lift 5 times the limit imposed by the company specialist.  The defendant disputed numerous aspects of the copied note and requested originals.  At trial, Plaintiff's counsel advised that the original no longer existed, but moments later upon direct questioning by the District Court, the plaintiff advised that the originals were at her home.  The District Court declared a mistrial and invited the Defendant to file a motion for sanctions, which resulted in a dismissal with prejudice on the basis of spoliation.

On appeal, the dismissal was reversed and the cause was remanded for re-trial.  Failure to produce a document can have the same practical effect of destroying it and, under certain circumstances, nonproduction may be characterized as spoliation. Theoretically, producing copies only where originals are requested may constitute spoliation if it would prevent discovery of critical information respecting, for example, the authenticity of the original.  Here, however, there was no spoliation in the nonproduction of the originals. 

In the circumstances, the plaintiff had an objectively foreseeable duty to preserve and turn over originals of the notes: there was fundamental disagreement on the meaning of the notes, plaintiff's counsel asked her on at least one occasion for the originals, defence counsel mentioned at several hearings throughout the proceedings that the originals had not been produced, and the plaintiff was compelled under Rule 1002 of the Federal Rules of Evidence to produce the originals before introducing the documents as evidence at trial.

However, while the originals were in the plaintiff's possession and were relevant to issues in the proceedings, there was no evidence supporting an intentional withholding of such evidence. Bad faith was stated to be pivotal to a spoliation determination and, the burden being on the defendant to prove the plaintiff's conduct was in bad faith, there was no evidentiary basis to favor a finding that the plaintiff lied or obfuscated to intentionally withhold documents from the defendant. The defendant did not make an effective request of the plaintiff to provide the original notes and, accordingly, knowledge of the specific requests could not be imputed to the plaintiff: the first request was not made directly upon the plaintiff and when relayed to her resulted in her seeking only new information or clearer copies, and the second request, which came five days prior to trial purporting to be a trial subpoena, was not properly issued and amounted to nothing more than a reminder that the best evidence rule would apply to the documents at issue.  The defendant's challenges to the authenticity of the notes at summary judgment and during pretrial motions was not enough, without directly pressing the plaintiff for the originals, to put her on notice that the defendant wanted or needed the originals.

The District Court's ruling was also partially ground in its inherent power to sanction the parties' conduct, however, on balance, the decision to dismiss the case constituted an abuse of discretion.  The District Court's decision to dismiss could only be supported on the basis that the defendant had suffered prejudice as a result of the nonproduction – there was no history of dilatoriness or bad faith with respect to the nonproduction, the plaintiff's claims had sufficient merit, and lesser alternative sanctions were available to appropriately remedy the harm caused by the nonproduction.  Prejudice alone may serve as a basis for ordering dismissal in some circumstances where severe impairment to the non-responsible party's case results from non-production, however, this was not the case here and any harm to the defendant's case could be properly reversed by drawing an adverse inference against the plaintiff for failing to produce the originals.

Brown v. Wilkinson, 2012 BCSC 398

This was an application for an order compelling the production of documents which, in part, were subject to claims of privilege.

The case involved a house fire which allegedly spread to and damaged a neighbouring property.  A professional fire investigator hired by the plaintiff concluded that the fire had travelled from the defendant's home to the plaintiff's.  However, the investigator was denied access to the defendant's home by the defendant's insurer.  As a result of the refusal, the plaintiff's insurer wrote to the defendant's insurer advising of a probable subrogated claim and requested that all physical evidence be preserved for investigation.  Despite the letter, the physical evidence was later removed, destroyed or otherwise made unavailable for inspection. 

The plaintiffs argued the subject documents were not privileged and, in the alternative, that there had been spoliation or the likelihood of spoliation such that fairness and equity require any alleged privileges be waived.  By contrast, the defendants argued the documents were created for the purpose of obtaining legal advice and/or had litigation as the dominant purpose for their creation.

After noting the distinctions between solicitor-client and litigation privilege, the court noted that, concerning documents sent to counsel for submission to an insurer, that the vague presence of counsel does not by any means establish solicitor-client privilege.  The court stated that each document is to be judged on its own, and the party claiming the privilege must establish it on the balance of probabilities.  The court was particularly concerned with counsel in this case being used as a shield, deflecting any request for access simply by his or her general or background presence.  Accordingly, the solicitor-client privilege claims were found to be unfounded with respect to many documents.

Regarding litigation-privilege, the court noted the requirements that there must have been a reasonable prospect of litigation and that the litigation was the dominant purpose of the creation of the document.  In the specific context of the insurance industry, it was noted that practically every claim could result in litigation.  The court therefore preferred a reasonable person approach to the requisite test.  In the specific context, it was noted that the documents obtained from fact-gathering could serve a dual purpose of negotiating a claim or defending a suit.  The court found that there was no evidence that negotiations were bound to fail and that facts gathered would therefore not aid in negotiations.  The dominant purpose therefore could not be said to be litigation and the claims failed in that respect. 

Perhaps most importantly, notwithstanding the rejection of the alleged privilege claims, the court agreed with the plaintiff that if spoliation had occurred as a result of the defendant's conduct, the interests of justice required the waiving of the privilege with respect to certain documents.  The court specifically noted the clear and emphatic language in the preservation letter and the consequences (or lack thereof) of writing the letter.  Denying access to the property was held not to be a trivial matter and, at the very least, the evidence should have been preserved.  The court noted the removal of the physical evidence without allowing the plaintiff an opportunity to inspect resulted in such an obvious imbalance that justice required the production of the communications and documents over which privilege was claimed. 

Both the timing of sending and unequivocal language contained in the letter were therefore critical to the courts determination regarding the waiving of any privilege that may have attached to the documents in question.


The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Events from this Firm
8 Nov 2016, Seminar, Ottawa, Canada

The prospect of an internal investigation raises many thorny issues. This presentation will canvass some of the potential triggering events, and discuss how to structure an investigation, retain forensic assistance and manage the inevitable ethical issues that will arise.

22 Nov 2016, Seminar, Ottawa, Canada

From the boardroom to the shop floor, effective organizations recognize the value of having a diverse workplace. This presentation will explore effective strategies to promote diversity, defeat bias and encourage a broader community outlook.

7 Dec 2016, Seminar, Ottawa, Canada

Staying local but going global presents its challenges. Gowling WLG lawyers offer an international roundtable on doing business in the U.K., France, Germany, China and Russia. This three-hour session will videoconference in lawyers from around the world to discuss business and intellectual property hurdles.

In association with
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
Email Address
Company Name
Confirm Password
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Media & IT
 Real Estate
 Wealth Mgt
Asia Pacific
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
United States
Worldwide Updates
Check to state you have read and
agree to our Terms and Conditions

Terms & Conditions and Privacy Statement (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd and as a user you are granted a non-exclusive, revocable license to access the Website under its terms and conditions of use. Your use of the Website constitutes your agreement to the following terms and conditions of use. Mondaq Ltd may terminate your use of the Website if you are in breach of these terms and conditions or if Mondaq Ltd decides to terminate your license of use for whatever reason.

Use of

You may use the Website but are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the content and articles available (the Content). You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these terms & conditions or with the prior written consent of Mondaq Ltd. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information about’s content, users or contributors in order to offer them any services or products which compete directly or indirectly with Mondaq Ltd’s services and products.


Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the documents and related graphics published on this server for any purpose. All such documents and related graphics are provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers hereby disclaim all warranties and conditions with regard to this information, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. In no event shall Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use or performance of information available from this server.

The documents and related graphics published on this server could include technical inaccuracies or typographical errors. Changes are periodically added to the information herein. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers may make improvements and/or changes in the product(s) and/or the program(s) described herein at any time.


Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including what sort of information you are interested in, for three primary purposes:

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, newsletter alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our information providers who provide information free for your use.

Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) do not sell or provide your details to third parties other than information providers. The reason we provide our information providers with this information is so that they can measure the response their articles are receiving and provide you with information about their products and services.

If you do not want us to provide your name and email address you may opt out by clicking here .

If you do not wish to receive any future announcements of products and services offered by Mondaq by clicking here .

Information Collection and Use

We require site users to register with Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to view the free information on the site. We also collect information from our users at several different points on the websites: this is so that we can customise the sites according to individual usage, provide 'session-aware' functionality, and ensure that content is acquired and developed appropriately. This gives us an overall picture of our user profiles, which in turn shows to our Editorial Contributors the type of person they are reaching by posting articles on Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) – meaning more free content for registered users.

We are only able to provide the material on the Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) site free to site visitors because we can pass on information about the pages that users are viewing and the personal information users provide to us (e.g. email addresses) to reputable contributing firms such as law firms who author those pages. We do not sell or rent information to anyone else other than the authors of those pages, who may change from time to time. Should you wish us not to disclose your details to any of these parties, please tick the box above or tick the box marked "Opt out of Registration Information Disclosure" on the Your Profile page. We and our author organisations may only contact you via email or other means if you allow us to do so. Users can opt out of contact when they register on the site, or send an email to with “no disclosure” in the subject heading

Mondaq News Alerts

In order to receive Mondaq News Alerts, users have to complete a separate registration form. This is a personalised service where users choose regions and topics of interest and we send it only to those users who have requested it. Users can stop receiving these Alerts by going to the Mondaq News Alerts page and deselecting all interest areas. In the same way users can amend their personal preferences to add or remove subject areas.


A cookie is a small text file written to a user’s hard drive that contains an identifying user number. The cookies do not contain any personal information about users. We use the cookie so users do not have to log in every time they use the service and the cookie will automatically expire if you do not visit the Mondaq website (or its affiliate sites) for 12 months. We also use the cookie to personalise a user's experience of the site (for example to show information specific to a user's region). As the Mondaq sites are fully personalised and cookies are essential to its core technology the site will function unpredictably with browsers that do not support cookies - or where cookies are disabled (in these circumstances we advise you to attempt to locate the information you require elsewhere on the web). However if you are concerned about the presence of a Mondaq cookie on your machine you can also choose to expire the cookie immediately (remove it) by selecting the 'Log Off' menu option as the last thing you do when you use the site.

Some of our business partners may use cookies on our site (for example, advertisers). However, we have no access to or control over these cookies and we are not aware of any at present that do so.

Log Files

We use IP addresses to analyse trends, administer the site, track movement, and gather broad demographic information for aggregate use. IP addresses are not linked to personally identifiable information.


This web site contains links to other sites. Please be aware that Mondaq (or its affiliate sites) are not responsible for the privacy practices of such other sites. We encourage our users to be aware when they leave our site and to read the privacy statements of these third party sites. This privacy statement applies solely to information collected by this Web site.

Surveys & Contests

From time-to-time our site requests information from users via surveys or contests. Participation in these surveys or contests is completely voluntary and the user therefore has a choice whether or not to disclose any information requested. Information requested may include contact information (such as name and delivery address), and demographic information (such as postcode, age level). Contact information will be used to notify the winners and award prizes. Survey information will be used for purposes of monitoring or improving the functionality of the site.


If a user elects to use our referral service for informing a friend about our site, we ask them for the friend’s name and email address. Mondaq stores this information and may contact the friend to invite them to register with Mondaq, but they will not be contacted more than once. The friend may contact Mondaq to request the removal of this information from our database.


This website takes every reasonable precaution to protect our users’ information. When users submit sensitive information via the website, your information is protected using firewalls and other security technology. If you have any questions about the security at our website, you can send an email to

Correcting/Updating Personal Information

If a user’s personally identifiable information changes (such as postcode), or if a user no longer desires our service, we will endeavour to provide a way to correct, update or remove that user’s personal data provided to us. This can usually be done at the “Your Profile” page or by sending an email to

Notification of Changes

If we decide to change our Terms & Conditions or Privacy Policy, we will post those changes on our site so our users are always aware of what information we collect, how we use it, and under what circumstances, if any, we disclose it. If at any point we decide to use personally identifiable information in a manner different from that stated at the time it was collected, we will notify users by way of an email. Users will have a choice as to whether or not we use their information in this different manner. We will use information in accordance with the privacy policy under which the information was collected.

How to contact Mondaq

You can contact us with comments or queries at

If for some reason you believe Mondaq Ltd. has not adhered to these principles, please notify us by e-mail at and we will use commercially reasonable efforts to determine and correct the problem promptly.