The plaintiffs sued the defendants, including the opposing party's law firm, for negligent misrepresentation regarding an equity raise condition in a loan agreement.
During discovery, the defendants sought communications between the plaintiffs and their own counsel, arguing that the plaintiffs' allegation of detrimental reliance constituted a deemed waiver of solicitor-client privilege.
The Master upheld the privilege, but the appeal judge reversed, finding a deemed waiver.
The Divisional Court granted leave to appeal, noting a conflict in the jurisprudence regarding whether alleging detrimental reliance equates to a waiver of privilege.
