Background: Robert Mitchinson, owning a strata lot in the respondent's strata development, sought production of legal opinions related to a human rights complaint filed against the strata. The strata refused, citing solicitor-client privilege. The Civil Resolution Tribunal (CRT) initially ruled in favor of Mitchinson, compelling the strata to produce the legal opinions, as he was not a party to the human rights complaint.

Judicial Review: The Supreme Court of British Columbia reviewed the CRT's decision, ultimately holding that while the Strata Property Act (SPA) promotes transparency among strata lot owners, this does not override the protection of solicitor-client privilege. The court imposed a temporal limit on disclosure, requiring the strata to disclose the legal opinions only after the human rights litigation concluded, including any appeals.

Issues/Main Discussion: The main issue revolved around the SPA's provisions relating to the production of strata corporation records, including legal opinions, and whether these provisions abrogate solicitor-client privilege.

Ruling:

• The Court of Appeal allowed Mitchinson's appeal but for different reasons than he argued. The court found that the SPA does not explicitly abrogate solicitor-client privilege and, thus, the strata cannot be compelled to produce the legal opinions at any time.
• The orders of both the CRT and the reviewing judge were set aside, and Mitchinson's application for the production of legal opinions was dismissed.

Amount Awarded: Not applicable as the court's decision was to dismiss the application for production of the legal opinions.