The plaintiff sued the defendant police service for malicious prosecution, negligent investigation, and wrongful arrest after criminal charges against him were withdrawn.
The defendant brought a motion to compel the plaintiff to answer questions refused during discovery, arguing that communications between the plaintiff and his criminal defence lawyer were relevant to whether the charges were terminated in his favour.
The court dismissed the motion, finding the communications irrelevant to the tort claims and protected by solicitor-client privilege, which had not been waived.
The court also declined to order the plaintiff to obtain records for a destroyed cellphone owned by a third party.
