Key Issues:

• Disclosure Request: Plaintiff sought records from an investigation into his termination. The Defendant claimed privilege over these records.

Records Sought:

• Transcripts and recordings of interviews with Plaintiff and Complainant 1.
• Identity and allegations of Complainant 2.
• Information gathered during the investigation.

Privilege Claims:

• Litigation Privilege: Asserted the investigation was conducted in anticipation of litigation.
• Solicitor-Client Privilege: Asserted the investigation aimed to gather information for legal advice.

Legal Principles:

• Litigation Privilege: Applies if the primary purpose of creating records was for litigation.
• Solicitor-Client Privilege: Covers communications for legal advice, including intermediaries if essential to the lawyer-client relationship.

Court’s Analysis:

• Dominant Purpose Test: The court found no sufficient evidence that the dominant purpose was litigation.
• Solicitor-Client Privilege: The investigation served dual purposes—legal advice and corporate governance under the Respectful Workplace Policy.

Findings:

• Conflicting affidavits from the Defendant about the investigation’s purpose led the court to prioritize the initial affidavit supporting operational purposes.
• Waiver of Privilege: By relying on the investigation findings in its defense, the Defendant waived any privilege over the materials.

Decision:

• The court ordered the disclosure of the investigation records sought by the Plaintiff, excluding the final report.
• No amount specified for costs/awards.

This decision underscores the importance of clear and consistent claims when asserting privilege over investigation records.