The plaintiff sued the defendant doctor for sexual assault.
Criminal charges against the defendant were stayed, but during the criminal proceedings, the defendant received a Crown Disclosure Brief, which included a statement he made to police that was ruled inadmissible due to a s. 10(b) Charter violation.
In the civil action, the plaintiff sought production of the Crown Brief.
The Divisional Court held that while the existence of the Crown Brief must be disclosed, its contents should not be produced until the Attorney General and relevant police service are notified and either consent or a court orders production.
Furthermore, the defendant's Charter-infringing statement to police was protected from production in the civil proceeding.
