PRACTICE |
Affidavits |
Poitras v. Sawridge Band
T-2655-89
2001 FCT 456, Hugessen J.
9/5/01
4 pp.
Motion to examine deponent on matters related to preparation, content of affidavit of documents unfounded--As general rule, affidavits of documents not normally subject to cross-examination without leave--To examine deponent on discovery with respect to matters concerning manner of preparation of affidavit of documents not proper discovery since not relating to pleaded issues in case--No material on record establishing non-produced, relevant documents either existing, or relevant--Unwarranted extension of scope of Everest Jennings Canadian Ltd. v. Invacare Corp. (1984), 79 C.P.R. (2d) 138 (F.C.A.) to say because document can be shown to have come from particular file, every other document in that file automatically relevant, must be produced--Unless, until contrary shown, affidavit of documents must be taken as setting out what it alleges accurately, fairly--Heavy burden on party seeking to have affidavit of documents set at nought--Burden not discharged--But claim for privilege in Crown's affidavit of documents too broad, vague--22 documents, bundles of documents identified only by index number--Further file identified by description only--No indication how many documents contained in bundles, dates; only general indication as to author, recipient--While description of document to which privilege claimed should not defeat claim for privilege, mere indication of date, name, title, initials of author, recipient normally not defeating claim for privilege unless special circumstance attaching--Motion allowed in part--Crown required to produce further, better affidavit of documents.