William S. Berardino

The accused were charged with corruption, fraud, and breach of trust.

The Crown objected to disclosing unredacted documents, claiming informer privilege, and sought an ex parte, in camera hearing.

The trial judge allowed defence counsel to attend the hearing subject to undertakings.

The Crown appealed under s. 37 of the Canada Evidence Act.

The Supreme Court of Canada held that the trial judge's decision was a disclosure order subject to appeal, and that the trial judge erred in permitting defence counsel to attend the hearing, as doing so would inevitably reveal information protected by the informer privilege.

The appellants challenged the constitutional validity of the Tobacco Damages and Health Care Costs Recovery Act, which allows the government of British Columbia to sue tobacco manufacturers to recover health care costs related to tobacco exposure.

The appellants argued the Act was ultra vires due to extra-territoriality, violated judicial independence, and offended the rule of law.

The Supreme Court of Canada dismissed the appeals, holding that the Act's pith and substance is property and civil rights in the province, it does not interfere with the adjudicative role of the courts, and it does not violate the unwritten constitutional principle of the rule of law.