Supreme Court

Decision Information

Decision Content

 

                                     IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA

                                          Citation: Flinn v. McFarland, 2002 NSSC 272

                                                                                                                                 Date:  20030103

                                                                                                                     Docket: SH No. 125545

                                                                                                                                Registry:  Halifax

Between:

                                                                   A. Bruce Flinn

                                                                                                                                Applicant(Plaintiff)

                                                                             v.

                                                   Robert McFarland and Day & Ross

With Head Office in Hartland, New Brunswick

and Carrying on Business in Nova Scotia

                                                                                                                    Respondents (Defendants)

 

 

                                                            LIBRARY HEADING

 

Judge:                       The Honourable Justice A. David MacAdam

 

Heard:                       May 26, 2002 in Halifax

 

Last Written

Submission:                        September 25, 2002

 

Oral Decision:         November 21, 2002

 

Written Decision:   January 03, 2003                                         

 

Subject:                    Production of Documents

Counsels Communications with Experts 

Counsels Brief 

Waiver of Privilege

 


Summary:                At issue is whether plaintiff counsel is required to disclose to defendants counsel his comments on a preliminary report prepared by an accident re-constructionist retained by the plaintiff, deletions from the plaintiffs medical file and witness interviews by plaintiffs law firm that were forwarded to a medical expert retained by the plaintiff.   Held, applying Greenwood Shopping Plaza v. Neil J. Buchanan Ltd. et al (1979), 31 N.S.R. (2d) 135 that where a party wishes to rely on the testimony of an expert, they waive any privilege, and must disclose all materials and communication made to the expert for the purpose of preparing their report.  It is not for the expert, nor the party retaining the expert, to excise the materials and communications on the basis they were not relied on by the expert in forming their opinion.  If provided, and made available to the expert, they must be disclosed to the opposite party.  The requirement to disclose extends to otherwise confidential communication by counsel, including matters within the solicitors brief, if and when an expert is retained to prepare a report and to testify at trial.

 

Issue:                                    Whether a party is required to disclose confidential and/or privileged communications or information provided to an expert retained to prepare a report and to testify at trial?

 

Result:                        The information and materials must be disclosed, and to the extent privileged, the privilege is waived.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

THIS INFORMATION SHEET DOES NOT FORM PART OF THE COURT'S DECISION.  QUOTES MUST BE FROM THE DECISION, NOT THIS LIBRARY SHEET.

 You are being directed to the most recent version of the statute which may not be the version considered at the time of the judgment.