2 total
Appeal dismissed; Charter damages claim against the regulator was struck.
In an appeal from Alberta proceedings, the appellant sought Charter damages under s. 24(1) after alleging a regulatory board breached freedom of expression by restricting communications.
The majority held the statutory immunity clause barred the damages claim and concluded the claim should be struck at the pleadings stage.
Concurring reasons emphasized the absence of proper constitutional notice and evidentiary record to decide constitutional invalidity.
Dissenting reasons would have permitted the claim to proceed, finding it not plain and obvious that damages were unavailable or that the immunity clause necessarily applied.
The appeal was dismissed with costs.
Solicitor-client privilege was not clearly displaced by the production power.
An access-to-information appeal considered whether statutory language allowing production despite any privilege of the law of evidence authorized a provincial privacy commissioner to compel records claimed as solicitor-client privileged.
The Court held that the provision did not clearly and unequivocally abrogate solicitor-client privilege in its substantive dimension.
Reading the statute as a whole, the Court found no clear legislative intent to set aside that privilege.
The appeal was dismissed, and the order compelling production was not upheld.
