Bone et al. v. Person et al., (2000) 145 Man.R.(2d) 85 (CA)
Judge | Scott, C.J.M., Huband and Philp, JJ.A. |
Court | Court of Appeal (Manitoba) |
Case Date | Wednesday December 08, 1999 |
Jurisdiction | Manitoba |
Citations | (2000), 145 Man.R.(2d) 85 (CA);2000 CanLII 26955 (MB CA);185 DLR (4th) 335;[2000] 5 WWR 199;[2000] MJ No 107 (QL);145 Man R (2d) 85;41 CPC (4th) 277 |
Bone v. Person (2000), 145 Man.R.(2d) 85 (CA);
218 W.A.C. 85
MLB headnote and full text
Temp. Cite: [2000] Man.R.(2d) TBEd. MR.004
Maria Bone (nee Lejermarea/Faskerti), Laslo Bone and Pal Bone (plaintiffs/appellants) v. Brian Person, Kennan Hspahic, Elaine Hspahic, Joanne M. Pilon, Pal Bone, Robert McGarva and Sandra McGarva (defendants/respondents)
(AI 98-30-03941)
Indexed As: Bone et al. v. Person et al.
Manitoba Court of Appeal
Scott, C.J.M., Huband and Philp, JJ.A.
February 23, 2000.
Summary:
The plaintiff claimed that she was injured in four separate motor vehicle collisions. Prior to her trial, the plaintiff was arrested and charged with attempting to defraud the Manitoba Public Insurance Corp. (the insurer of all four defendants). The plaintiff's then counsel for the civil proceedings testified at the criminal trial. A waiver of solicitor/client privilege was given to facilitate his testimony. At issue was whether this waiver applied in the civil proceedings. Also at issue (if the first issue was answered positively), was whether the court possessed a discretion to restrict the withdrawal of solicitor/client privilege to the criminal proceedings if it concluded that the admission of the evidence was unfair.
The Manitoba Court of Appeal held that the waiver of privilege did apply in the civil proceedings. The court further held that while it had discretion to restrict the withdrawal of solicitor/client privilege to the earlier proceedings, it would not do so in this case.
Evidence - Topic 4106
Witnesses - Privilege - Waiver of privilege - The plaintiff claimed that she was injured in four separate motor vehicle collisions - Prior to her trial the plaintiff was arrested and charged with attempting to defraud the Manitoba Public Insurance Corp. (the insurer of all four defendants) - The plaintiff's then counsel for the civil proceedings testified at the criminal trial - A waiver of solicitor/client privilege was given to facilitate his testimony - At issue was whether this waiver applied in the civil proceedings - Also at issue (if the first issue was answered positively), was whether the court possessed a discretion to restrict the withdrawal of solicitor/client privilege to the criminal proceedings if it concluded that the admission of the evidence was unfair - The Manitoba Court of Appeal held that the waiver did apply in the civil proceedings - The court further held that while it had discretion to restrict the withdrawal of solicitor/client privilege to the earlier proceedings, it would not do so in this case.
Evidence - Topic 4255
Witnesses - Privilege - Lawyer-client communications - Waiver - By offer of evidence at trial - [See Evidence - Topic 4106].
Cases Noticed:
Power Consolidated (China) Pulp Inc. v. British Columbia Resources Investment Corp., [1989] 2 W.W.R. 679 (B.C.C.A.), refd to. [para. 10].
Transamerica Life Insurance Co. of Canada v. Canada Life Assurance Co. (1995), 46 C.P.C.(3d) 110 (Ont. Gen. Div.), refd to. [para. 10].
Green v. Crapo (1902), 181 Mass. 55; 62 N.E. 956, refd to. [para. 12].
McKinney v. Grand Street, P.P. & F.R. Co. (1887), 104 N.Y. 352; 10 N.E. 544, refd to. [para. 14].
State v. Mincey (1984), 687 P.2d 1180 (Ariz. S.C. In Banc), refd to. [para. 14].
People v. Phillips (1984), 470 N.E.2d 1137 (Ill. App. 5 Dist.), refd to. [para. 14].
Malone v. Malone, [1986] 1 W.W.R. 185 (B.C.S.C.), refd to. [para. 16].
British Coal Corp. v. Dennis Rye Ltd. et al. (No. 2), [1988] 3 All E.R. 816 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 17].
Elliott v. Kansas (City) (1906), 96 S.W.R. 1023 (S.C.), refd to. [para. 21].
Authors and Works Noticed:
Dolden, Eric A., Waiver of Privilege: The Triumph of Candour over Confidentiality (1989), 35 C.P.C.(2d) 56, pp. 77, 78 [para. 16].
Marcus, Richard L., The Perils of Privilege: Waiver and the Litigator, 84 Mich. L. Rev. 1605, p. 1627 [para. 23].
McCormick, Charles Tilford, Handbook on the Law of Evidence (2nd Ed. 1972), p. 196 [para. 12].
Watson, Gary, Solicitor-Client Privilege in Litigation: Current Developments and Future Trends, C.B.A. Ontario Continuing Legal Education (October 19, 1991), generally [para. 22].
Wigmore, John Henry, Evidence in Trials at Common Law (McNaughton Rev. Ed. 1961), vol. 8, para. 2389(4) [para. 13]; p. 855 [para. 21].
Counsel:
S.B. Simmonds and D.A. Kreel, for the appellant, M. Bone;
R.B. King, Q.C., for the respondent, Brian Person.
This appeal was heard on December 8, 1999, before Scott, C.J.M., Huband and Philp, JJ.A., of the Manitoba Court of Appeal. Scott, C.J.M., delivered the following judgment on February 23, 2000.
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeUnlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

Start Your 7-day Trial
-
Canada (Procureur général) c. Slansky,
...S.C.R. 455, (1999), 169 D.L.R. (4th) 385; R. v. Gruenke, [1991] 3 S.C.R. 263, [1991] 6 W.W.R. 673; Bone v. Person, 2000 CanLII 26955, 185 D.L.R. (4th) 335 (Man. C.A.); Rangerv. Penterman, 2011 ONCA 412, 342 D.L.R. (4th) 690; [2015] 1 R.C.F. CANADA c. SLANSKY 91CSC 25, [2005] 1 R.C.S. 401; S......
-
Slansky v. Canada (Attorney General) et al., (2013) 449 N.R. 28 (FCA)
...when there is information to communicate, but slammed shut when information is sought. See, e.g. , Bone v. Person , 2000 CanLII 26955, 145 Man. R.(2d) 85 at paragraph 14 (C.A.); Ranger v. Penterman , 2011 ONCA 412, O.J. No. 2414 at paragraph 16. A party may not cherry-pick privileged commun......
-
Table of cases
...Hockey Ltd., [2007] B.C.J. No. 179, 2007 BCSC 143 ........................................................... 51 Bone v. Person (2000), 145 Man. R. (2d) 85, 185 D.L.R. (4th) 335, [2000] M.J. No. 107 (C.A.) .......................................................... 240 Brace v. Snow (2012), ......
-
Privileges, Protections, and Immunities
...Simmons JA’s discussion of waiver was not at issue. 18 Wigmore, Evidence in Trials , above note 1, s 2327. 19 Bone v Person (2000), 145 Man R (2d) 85 (CA) at para 14. 20 S & K Processors Ltd v Campbell Ave Herring Producers Ltd (1983), 45 BCLR 218 (SC) at 220. Privileges, Protections, and I......
-
Slansky v. Canada (Attorney General) et al., (2013) 449 N.R. 28 (FCA)
...when there is information to communicate, but slammed shut when information is sought. See, e.g. , Bone v. Person , 2000 CanLII 26955, 145 Man. R.(2d) 85 at paragraph 14 (C.A.); Ranger v. Penterman , 2011 ONCA 412, O.J. No. 2414 at paragraph 16. A party may not cherry-pick privileged commun......
-
Canada (Procureur général) c. Slansky,
...S.C.R. 455, (1999), 169 D.L.R. (4th) 385; R. v. Gruenke, [1991] 3 S.C.R. 263, [1991] 6 W.W.R. 673; Bone v. Person, 2000 CanLII 26955, 185 D.L.R. (4th) 335 (Man. C.A.); Rangerv. Penterman, 2011 ONCA 412, 342 D.L.R. (4th) 690; [2015] 1 R.C.F. CANADA c. SLANSKY 91CSC 25, [2005] 1 R.C.S. 401; S......
-
Bari c. R., (2006) 308 N.B.R.(2d) 247 (CA)
...once and for all the confidentiality sought to be protected by the privilege." See Bone et al. v. Person et al. , [2000] M.J. No. 107; 145 Man.R.(2d) 85; 218 W.A.C. 85 (C.A.), at para. 13. [44] In addition, it seems to me to be unfair to allow Mr. Bari to pick and choose what parts of his c......
-
Kwok v. Kwok, [2008] B.C.T.C. Uned. 21
...or group of documents: see Harry at para. 25; Berghuis v. Future Shop Ltd. , 2000 BCSC 1398, 99 A.C.W.S. (3d) 566; Bone v. Person (2000), 145 Man. R. (2d) 85, 185 D.L.R. (4th) 335 (C.A.); and 927966 Ontario Ltd. v. Cogenix Development Corp. (1999), 93 A.C.W.S (3d) 232, [1994] B.C.J. No. 277......
-
Table of cases
...Hockey Ltd., [2007] B.C.J. No. 179, 2007 BCSC 143 ........................................................... 51 Bone v. Person (2000), 145 Man. R. (2d) 85, 185 D.L.R. (4th) 335, [2000] M.J. No. 107 (C.A.) .......................................................... 240 Brace v. Snow (2012), ......
-
Table of Cases
...Ltd., [2007] B.C.J. No. 179, 2007 BCSC 143 .................................................................... 227 Bone v. Person (2000), 145 Man. R. (2d) 85, [2000] M.J. No. 107, 185 D.L.R. (4th) 335 (C.A.) ......................................................................... 220 Brit......
-
Privileges, Protections, and Immunities
...Simmons JA’s discussion of waiver was not at issue. 18 Wigmore, Evidence in Trials , above note 1, s 2327. 19 Bone v Person (2000), 145 Man R (2d) 85 (CA) at para 14. 20 S & K Processors Ltd v Campbell Ave Herring Producers Ltd (1983), 45 BCLR 218 (SC) at 220. Privileges, Protections, and I......
-
Table of cases
...283 Blue Line Hockey Acquisition Co v Orca Bay Hockey Ltd, 2007 BCSC 143 ..... 306 Bone v Person (2000), 145 Man R (2d) 85 (CA)................................................. 292 Brace v Snow, 2012 NLCA 24 ............................................................................. 283 B......