The defence moved for disclosure of legal advice provided to the Guelph Police Service, arguing that the police implicitly waived solicitor-client privilege by referencing legal advice in an Information to Obtain (ITO) a search warrant, thereby putting their good faith in issue.
The Crown and Guelph Police Service denied waiver.
The court distinguished the facts from R. v. Campbell, finding no illegal police activity and that the references to legal advice were part of a narrative for full disclosure, not an attempt to justify illegal activity.
The court held that the police did not implicitly waive privilege, and the defence's request for disclosure was dismissed.
