Hynes v. Suncor Energy Inc., (2015) 366 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 324 (NLTD(G))

• Judge: Butler, J.
• Court: Supreme Court of Newfoundland and Labrador (Canada)
• Case Date: April 09, 2015
• Jurisdiction: Newfoundland and Labrador
• Citations: (2015), 366 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 324 (NLTD(G))

Hynes v. Suncor Energy (2015), 366 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 324 (NLTD(G));

    1144 A.P.R. 324

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2015] Nfld. & P.E.I.R. TBEd. MY.001

James Hynes (plaintiff) v. Suncor Energy Inc. (defendant)

(201201G5415; 2015 NLTD(G) 58)

Indexed As: Hynes v. Suncor Energy Inc.

Newfoundland and Labrador Supreme Court

Trial Division (General)

Butler, J.

April 30, 2015.

Summary:

The plaintiff sued the defendant, seeking damages on the basis of four causes of action: defamation, conspiracy, intimidation and intentional interference with economic relations. The defendant applied for an order striking all, or portions of, the statement of claim. Alternatively, the defendant sought an order for further and better particulars of each of the plaintiff's allegations. Finally, the defendant sought costs on a solicitor and client basis.

The Newfoundland and Labrador Supreme Court, Trial Division (General), in a decision reported at 352 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 69; 1097 A.P.R. 69, found several deficiencies in the plaintiff's statement of claim but struck only that portion wherein the plaintiff sought an apology from the defendant. The other deficiencies were characterized as defects that could be cured by amendments to the statement of claim for which the court granted the plaintiff leave to file an application. In January 2015, the plaintiff applied for an order compelling disclosure of electronic records, satisfaction of undertakings and an amended list of documents.

The Newfoundland and Labrador Supreme Court, Trial Division (General), allowed the application.

Practice - Topic 4552

Discovery - Production and inspection of documents - General - Time when available - The plaintiff sued the defendant, seeking damages on the basis of four causes of action: defamation, conspiracy, intimidation and intentional interference with economic relations - The defendant applied for an order striking all, or portions of, the statement of claim - The application judge found several deficiencies in the plaintiff's statement of claim but struck only that portion wherein the plaintiff sought an apology from the defendant - The other deficiencies were characterized as defects that could be cured by amendments to the statement of claim for which the court granted the plaintiff leave to file an application - In January 2015, the plaintiff applied for an order compelling disclosure of electronic records, satisfaction of undertakings and an amended list of documents - The defendant asserted that the plaintiff's application was premature since the statement of claim on file remained defective - At issue was, inter alia, whether pre-trial disclosure could be addressed before perfection of the originating document - The Newfoundland and Labrador Supreme Court, Trial Division (General), held that since the defendant later acknowledged that two of the causes of action were now properly pleaded in the draft amended statement of claim, there was no reason to delay issues of pre-trial disclosure which related to these claims - See paragraphs 12 to 18.

Practice - Topic 4573

Discovery - What documents must be produced - Documents related to or relevant and material to matters in issue - The plaintiff sued the defendant, seeking damages on the basis of four causes of action: defamation, conspiracy, intimidation and intentional interference with economic relations - The defendant applied for an order striking all, or portions of, the statement of claim - The application judge found several deficiencies in the plaintiff's statement of claim but struck only that portion wherein the plaintiff sought an apology from the defendant - The other deficiencies were characterized as defects that could be cured by amendments to the statement of claim for which the court granted the plaintiff leave to file an application - In January 2015, the plaintiff applied for an order compelling disclosure of electronic records, satisfaction of undertakings and an amended list of documents - The Newfoundland and Labrador Supreme Court, Trial Division (General), allowed the application - The court ordered the defendant to produce to the plaintiffs:"(i) all documents related to what witnesses Kerri Lynn Best and Donna Donovan acknowledged to have been a claim communicated to Suncor by Mr. David Squires (that Mr. Hynes was in a conflict of interest and should not obtain the position in question); (ii) records of all communication that led to a meeting between Larry Breen and Stewart Strong of Suncor on June 14 or 15, 2012, at which meeting the Plaintiff's fitness for the position was discussed; and (iii) all communication subsequent to the meeting of June 14 or 15, 2012 that touches in any way on the Plaintiff's vision and/or suitability for the position. (b) the Defendant shall comply with all undertakings given at the discoveries of the Suncor employees held June 14, July 8 and in September 2013, as well as make fulsome responses to matters 'taken under advisement' on each of these discoveries; (c) the Defendant shall disclose all communications in the e-mail chain (a portion of which is found at Tab 4 of Mr. Hynes' Affidavit and which confirms communication between Sam Allen of Technip, David Squires of Pro-Dive and Larry Breen of Suncor in 2006, addressing the issue of conflict of interest with Mr. Hynes; (d) the Defendant shall appoint one representative to inform himself or herself of all issues, documents, electronic records and personnel involved in the broad issue of Mr. Hynes' potential to be employed on a contract between Suncor and Technip in the period May/June 2012, and which contract did not ultimately materialize; and (e) the Defendant shall identify an I.T. person qualified to search the Defendant's records and that this individual shall prepare an affidavit to be filed with the Court and served on the Plaintiff establishing: ∙ his/her qualifications; ∙ the nature of the electronic search; ∙ the parameters of the electronic search, including the personnel whose computers were accessed, the search period and the search terms; and ∙ conclusions made with respect to any data deleted and therefore inaccessible within the relevant period; and 3. The Defendant shall file and serve on the Plaintiff an Amended List of Documents. Part 1 shall include all relevant records disclosed through the electronic search required above. Part 2 shall be completed to identify each document for which privilege is claimed and a sufficient statement of the grounds for which privilege is claimed." - See paragraphs 19 to 50.

Cases Noticed:

Pritchett et al. v. Toronto Dominion Bank et al. (1987), 67 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 218; 206 A.P.R. 218; 6 A.C.W.S.(3d) 421 (Nfld. S.C.T.D.), refd to. [para. 32].

Doucet et al. v. v. Spielo Manufacturing Inc. et al. (2007), 327 N.B.R.(2d) 1; 840 A.P.R. 1; 2007 NBCA 85, refd to. [para. 36].

GRI Simulations Inc. v. Oceaneering International Inc. et al. (2010), 301 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 16; 932 A.P.R. 16; 2010 NLTD 85, refd to. [para. 41].

Tran v. Kerr (2014), 584 A.R. 306; 623 W.A.C. 306; 2014 ABCA 350, refd to. [para. 44].

Scherle (Peter) Holdings Ltd. et al. v. Gibson Pass Resort Inc. et al., [2007] B.C.T.C. Uned. E70; 2007 BCSC 770, refd to. [para. 46].

Authors and Works Noticed:

Green, J. Derek, and Curran, Christopher, Practice and Procedure (2010), generally [para. 12].

Counsel:

M. John Mate, for the plaintiff;

D. Blair Pritchett, for the defendant.

This application was heard at St. John's, N.L., on April 9, 2015, by Butler, J., of the Newfoundland and Labrador Supreme Court, Trial Division (General), who delivered the following reasons for judgment on April 30, 2015.