The defendant doctors appealed a Master's decision dismissing their motion to compel discovery answers and production of their initial lawyers' file concerning the plaintiff's capacity and whether a de facto litigation guardian existed.
The court found the Master erred in her relevancy and privilege analysis, particularly regarding the importance of counsel's opinion on capacity and the scope of a de facto litigation guardian under s. 7 of the Limitations Act, 2002.
The appeal was allowed in part, requiring the plaintiffs to produce a revised affidavit of documents and reattend examinations for discovery, with privilege waived for documents relevant to Mr. Wood's capacity and Mr. McQueen's dealings with the initial lawyers.
