The defendant sought a ruling on whether third-party records ordered produced to the defence under section 278.7 of the Criminal Code are subject to the admissibility framework set out in section 278.92 (as amended by Bill C-51).
The defendant argued that records judicially produced following a screening process that already balanced privacy and fair trial interests should not be subject to a second admissibility hearing.
The Crown argued that section 278.92 applies to all records in the accused's possession regardless of how possession was obtained.
The court held that the production and admissibility regimes serve different forensic functions and that records ordered produced under section 278.7 remain subject to the section 278.92 admissibility framework before being adduced in evidence.
