R. v. Eddy, 2014 DTC 5050 [at at 6780], 2014 ABQB 164

The accused brought an application to compel the crown to disclose an extensive list of documents, detailed in a 205-page brief. The documents sought included all investigation files related the the Porisky investigation (involving another taxpayer in allegedly similar circumstances), as well as "all file contents and other media formats, including ... documents, ... e-mails, memos, working papers, phone messages, minutes from conference calls, and post-it-notes" that may have been held by, among others, CRA, the Department of Justice, the RCMP commissioner, and the Minister of Public Safety.

The taxpayer's application was dismissed in the main. There were bases to deny all of the requested documents, including privilege or irrelevance. In many cases, there was no reason to believe that the requested documents even existed.

Some other documents were neither privileged, irrelevant, nor non-existent, but simply fell outside the Crown's obligations. Electronic metadata, e.g. creation and modification dates, did not speak to the elements of the offence and were not part of the case to meet (para. 127). The Crown was also under no duty to collect witness statements (i.e. what a witness intends to say at trial) that did not already exist from people it did not intend to call at trial - the accused was not entitled "to use the Crown as her agent and to conduct an investigation" (para. 137). However, the Crown was ordered to disclose any witness statements already collected, even for witnesses that the Crown did not intend to call - assuming that any such undisclosed statements existed (para. 135).

The accused brought an application to compel the crown to disclose an extensive list of documents, detailed in a 205-page brief. The documents sought included all investigation files related the the Porisky investigation (involving another taxpayer in allegedly similar circumstances), as well as "all file contents and other media formats, including ... documents, ... e-mails, memos, working papers, phone messages, minutes from conference calls, and post-it-notes" that may have been held by, among others, CRA, the Department of Justice, the RCMP commissioner, and the Minister of Public Safety.

The taxpayer's application was dismissed in the main. There were bases to deny all of the requested documents, including privilege or irrelevance. In many cases, there was no reason to believe that the requested documents even existed.

Some other documents were neither privileged, irrelevant, nor non-existent, but simply lay outside the Crown's obligations. Electronic metadata, e.g. creation and modification dates, did not speak to the elements of the offence and were not part of the case to meet (para. 127). The Crown was also under no duty to collect witness statements (i.e. what a witness intends to say at trial) that did not already exist from people it did not intend to call at trial - the accused was not entitled "to use the Crown as her agent and to conduct an investigation" (para. 137). However, the Crown was ordered to disclose any witness statements already collected, even for witnesses that the Crown did not intend to call - assuming that any such undisclosed statements existed (para. 135).