OCPC-INQ -#13-03
2013 ONCPC 2502
ONTARIO CIVILIAN POLICE COMMISSION
IN THE MATTER OF A HEARING UNDER S. 25 OF THE POLICE SERVICES ACT, R.S.O. 1990, C. P.15, AS AMENDED, INTO THE CONDUCT OF GREG OLIVER, MEMBER OF THE STIRLING-RAWDON POLICE SERVICES BOARD
DECISION ON MOTION
Panel: Noëlle Caloren, Member Roy Conacher Q.C., Member
Hearing Date: March 4, 2013 Hearing Location: Toronto, Ontario
Ontario Civilian Police Commission 250 Dundas Street West, Suite 605 Toronto, ON M7A 2T3 Tel: 416-314-3004 Fax: 416-314-0198 Website: www.ocpc.ca
Appearances: Prabhu Rajan, Counsel for the Ontario Civilian Police Commission Patrick E. Hurley, Counsel for Greg Oliver
Introduction
This decision relates to a Motion brought by Counsel for the Ontario Civilian Police Commission (the “Commission”) with respect to information disclosed by the Commission to Mr. Oliver, member of the Stirling-Rawdon Police Services Board, in advance of the contemplated Section 25 hearing.
At issue is the disclosure of information which the Commission claims is protected by solicitor-client privilege and is contained in handwritten notes made by Brian Haggith, an Ontario Provincial Police Officer seconded to the Ministry of Community Safety and Correctional Services (the “Ministry”) as a Police Services Advisor. Mr. Haggith was responsible for providing advice to Police Services Boards in the Eastern Ontario region, which included the Stirling-Rawdon Police Services Board (the “Board”).
On March 4, 2013, the Panel heard a motion brought by the Commission for the following Orders:
(a) a declaration that the notes disclosed are privileged;
(b) an Order that counsel for Mr. Oliver return any and all copies of the notes in question forthwith;
(c) an Order prohibiting counsel from using the privileged information for the purpose of this litigation or any other litigation;
(d) an Order requiring counsel for Mr. Oliver to ensure that all work product related to the information contained in the disclosed document be destroyed;
(e) an Order requiring counsel for Mr. Oliver to confirm compliance with the Orders, in writing, to counsel for the Commission;
(f) in the event that counsel provided the document to any third party, including Mr. Oliver, that similar Orders be made against all such persons and;
(g) an Order abridging the time for service and filing of the Motion.
Decision
- An order is granted abridging the time for service of the Motion materials. The Motion is dismissed for the reasons set out below.
Background
Mr. Oliver is a member of the Board. As a result of an investigation undertaken by the Commission under Section 25(1) of the Police Services Act, R.S.O. 1990 c.P15 as amended (the “Act”), Mr. Oliver was charged with engaging in conduct which discredits and compromises the integrity of the Board or the Stirling-Rawdon Police Services, contrary to sections 4, 5, 7, 8, 9 or 13 of the Members of Police Services Board, Code of Conduct, Ontario Regulation 421/97. A disciplinary hearing is scheduled to take place with regard to the charges against Mr. Oliver.
In anticipation of the scheduled hearing, the parties agreed to and have acknowledged compliance with their disclosure obligations as stipulated in the [Statutory Powers Procedure Act](https://www.canlii.org/en/on/laws/stat/rso-1990-c-s22/latest/rso-1990-c-s