The respondent, Michael Kitt, brought a motion to compel the applicant, Amy Benson, to answer four questions refused during questioning and to produce related documents.
The questions pertained to a reporting letter from Benson's former solicitor, the mediator's file from a prior mediation, Benson's therapist's file, and a private investigator's file.
The court dismissed the motion, finding that the solicitor's reporting letter was protected by solicitor-client privilege and res judicata, the mediator's file by settlement privilege and contractual confidentiality, the therapist's file by patient-therapist privilege (applying the Wigmore test due to marginal relevance and high intrusiveness), and the private investigator's file was irrelevant to the issues in dispute.
