2 total
Cheques involving a lawyer obtained from a financial institution are presumptively not privileged.
The Crown sought directions regarding solicitor-client privilege over financial documents (cheques and statements of account) obtained from financial institutions during a fraud investigation against the defendants.
The court ruled that cheques to or from a lawyer/law firm are presumptively not privileged when obtained from a financial institution, as they reflect transactions, not communications.
Even if presumed privileged, that presumption was rebutted in this case.
For legal invoices, the court ordered that copies be securely retained until the conclusion of proceedings or destroyed, and that a vetted copy of seized records be made for disclosure.
The Court of Appeal upheld the appellant's drug convictions, finding the police lawfully seized and searched an apparently abandoned vehicle after he fled.
Appeal from convictions for possession of cocaine for the purpose of trafficking and failure to comply with a probation order.
The appellant challenged the trial judge's pre-trial ruling dismissing his application to exclude evidence arising from alleged breaches of sections 8 and 9 of the Charter.
The key issues were whether the appellant had a reasonable expectation of privacy in the vehicle, whether the vehicle was lawfully seized and searched, and whether the appellant was arbitrarily detained.
The Court of Appeal upheld the trial judge's findings on all grounds, dismissing the appeal.
