Bank of Nova Scotia v. Deputy Attorney General of Canada, 92 DTC 6313 (Ont. Ct. (G.D.))

The province "where the matter arises" is the province where the document in question is situate, rather than the province where the judicial proceeding to determine the privilege takes place.

With respect to the preparation of a list of the documents for purposes of determining whether they were privileged, the appellant had no general right to require that the name of the sender of the document, and its date, be excluded.

After noting that when Parliament amended what now is s. 232(1)(e) without altering the wording of the portion of that definition which had been commented upon in Deputy Attorney General of Canada v. Brown, [1965] S.C.R. 84, Mandel J. then noted that he was fortified in the conclusion he already had reached by the presumption found in Ex Parte Campbell, L.R. 5 Ch. App. 703 at 706 that:

"'Where once certain words in an Act of Parliament have received a judicial construction in one of the Superior Courts, and the Legislature has repeated them without any alteration in a subsequent statute, I conceive that the Legislature must be taken to have used them according to the meaning which a Court of competent jurisdiction has given to them.'"