The plaintiff sued the defendant for sexual assault and sought production of the Crown brief from the defendant's related criminal proceedings.
The criminal trial had been stayed, and the defendant's statements to the police had been excluded due to a breach of his s. 10(b) Charter rights.
The Court of Appeal upheld the Divisional Court's creation of a screening mechanism, requiring notice to the Attorney General and police before a Crown brief can be produced in civil proceedings.
However, the Court of Appeal reversed the Divisional Court's ruling that the defendant's excluded police statements were shielded from production, holding that the criminal rule of automatic exclusion for conscriptive evidence does not apply in the civil discovery context.
