Dr. Kerry Preibisch

The intervenor sought direction on whether e-mails between its counsel and its proposed expert witness regarding hearing preparation and draft responses were subject to a prior disclosure order.

The corporate respondent argued the communications amounted to draft reports or instructions and should be disclosed.

The Tribunal held that the communications fell within litigation privilege and did not constitute instructions or draft reports within the meaning of the production order.

The Tribunal directed that the e-mails need not be disclosed.

During a hearing on the merits of sexual harassment allegations by migrant workers, the respondent requested production of correspondence and notes between the intervenor's counsel and its expert witness.

The intervenor objected on the basis of litigation privilege and untimeliness.

The Tribunal ordered partial production, guided by civil case law, requiring disclosure of instructions, foundational notes, prior drafts, and foundational correspondence, but protecting other communications under litigation privilege.

Justicia for Migrant Workers (J4MW) sought leave to intervene and present expert evidence in human rights applications alleging sexual harassment and differential pay of migrant workers at the respondent's fish processing facility.

The respondents opposed the request, arguing it would cause delay and add complexity.

The Tribunal granted the request, finding that J4MW had a particular perspective to add regarding the social context of migrant workers that would assist the Tribunal, and that the new Code and Rules permit granting an intervenor full participatory rights.