J. Tremblay-Hall

The applicants, charged with drug trafficking offences, brought an application for disclosure of police notes related to a search warrant.

The Information to Obtain (ITO) relied heavily on information from confidential informants.

The affiant officer stated she reviewed the handler's notes when drafting the ITO.

The Crown refused to disclose these source notes, arguing they were irrelevant.

The court held that because the affiant expressly reviewed and relied on the handler's notes, they formed part of the investigative file and must be disclosed, subject to redactions to protect informant privilege.

The moving party sought leave to appeal the dismissal of a Rule 21 motion that had attempted to strike the plaintiff’s claim against a First Nation on the basis of an expired limitation period and lack of a reasonable cause of action.

The proposed appeal raised the issue of whether provincial limitation statutes bar claims against a First Nation for breach of fiduciary duty where the claim involves on-reserve property and the relationship between band and member.

The court acknowledged that the law in this area contains ambiguity and that the issue is of general importance.

However, the court held that the motions judge had refused to strike the claim primarily because the evidentiary record was insufficient at the pleadings stage to determine the applicability of limitation statutes.

Leave to appeal was refused because the issues should be determined on a fuller factual record rather than in an interlocutory appeal.