In this 100-page decision, the Chief Justice examines the principles of discovery:
[14] … “[15] The Federal Court of Appeal in The Queen v Lehigh Cement Limited,2011 FCA 120, 2011 DTC 5069, at paragraphs 34 and 35, described the general limits respecting discoveries:
“‘[34] The jurisprudence establishes that a question is relevant when there is a reasonable likelihood that it might elicit information which may directly or indirectly enable the party seeking the answer to advance its case or to damage the case of its adversary, or which fairly might lead to a train of inquiry that may either advance the questioning party’s case or damage the case of its adversary. Whether this test is met will depend on the allegations the questioning party seeks to establish or refute.'”
[15] Further to the issue of relevancy, other judgments of the Tax Court of Canada (“TCC”) have noted the role that pleadings play in defining relevancy. In Teelucksingh v The Queen,[8] the Court noted that:
“(i) Examination for discovery is an examination as to the information and belief of the other party as to facts that are relevant to the matters in issue, as defined by the pleadings.
…
“(vi) The examining party is entitled to have production of any documents that are relevant to the matters in issue as defined by the pleadings, but subject to proper claims of privilege.[9]“
The Court also considered the rules relating to: solicitor-client privilege and to waiver of that privilege; settlement privilege; and litigation privilege.
Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce v. The Queen 2015 TCC 280 (Rossiter CJ)