The accused brought applications for first-party disclosure and third-party production arising from charges connected to the Freedom Convoy protest.
The court applied the Stinchcombe disclosure regime and the O’Connor likely relevance framework, while first addressing asserted claims of solicitor-client privilege and work product privilege.
Communications between the Crown Attorney’s office and police, and emails involving PPS counsel, were held privileged and were not producible.
The court ordered limited disclosure to itself of specified police and PPS materials, including certain duty book notes, reports, and potentially relevant communications and footage, but dismissed the balance of the broader disclosure requests for lack of likely relevance.
