Potash Corp. of Saskatchewan v. Barton, (2001) 207 Sask.R. 250 (CA)

• Judge: Cameron, J.A.
• Court: Court of Appeal (Saskatchewan)
• Case Date: April 25, 2001
• Jurisdiction: Saskatchewan
• Citations: (2001), 207 Sask.R. 250 (CA);2001 SKCA 56

Potash Corp. v. Barton (2001), 207 Sask.R. 250 (CA);

    247 W.A.C. 250

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2001] Sask.R. TBEd. MY.041

Potash Corporation of Saskatchewan and Potash Corporation of Saskatchewan Sales (applicant) v. Keith Barton (respondent)

(C.A. No. 197; 2001 SKCA 56)

Indexed As: Potash Corp. of Saskatchewan v. Barton

Saskatchewan Court of Appeal

Cameron, J.A.

April 25, 2001.

Summary:

Potash Corp. of Saskatchewan (PCS) sued its former solicitor (Barton) for breach of solicitor and client privilege in disclosing information concerning PCS. The trial judge ordered that the files in the action be sealed. The order was appealed and PCS sought an order denying public access to the files of the Court of Appeal pending the hearing of the appeal.

The Saskatchewan Court of Appeal, per Cameron, J.A., allowed the application in part. Given the venerable tradition of openness in the courts, the court was unwilling to deny public access to the files. There was nothing in the nature of the information requiring denial of public access. However, the parties agreed to (and the court ordered) a publication ban respecting the information pending the hearing of the appeal.

Courts - Topic 1443

Administration - Documents filed by parties, public right of access (incl. videotapes) - Public right of access - General - Potash Corp. of Saskatchewan (PCS) sued its former solicitor (Barton) for breach of solicitor and client privilege in disclosing information concerning PCS - The trial judge ordered that the files in the action be sealed - The order was appealed and PCS sought an order denying public access to the files of the Court of Appeal pending the hearing of the appeal - The Saskatchewan Court of Appeal, per Cameron, J.A., allowed the application in part - Given the venerable tradition of openness in the courts, the court was unwilling to deny public access to the files - There was nothing in the nature of the information requiring denial of public access - However, the parties agreed to (and the court ordered) a publication ban respecting the information pending the hearing of the appeal.

Practice - Topic 5003

Conduct of trial - General principles - Ban on publication - [See Courts - Topic 1443 ].

Cases Noticed:

MacIntyre v. Nova Scotia (Attorney General) et al., [1982] 1 S.C.R. 175; 40 N.R. 181; 49 N.S.R.(2d) 609; 96 A.P.R. 609, refd to. [para. 3].

Edmonton Journal v. Alberta (Attorney General), [1989] 2 S.C.R. 1326; 102 N.R. 321; 103 A.R. 321, refd to. [para. 3].

Canadian Broadcasting Corp. v. New Brunswick (Attorney General), [1996] 3 S.C.R. 480; 203 N.R. 169; 182 N.R. 81; 463 A.P.R. 81, refd to. [para. 3].

Counsel:

Neil B. Fisher, for the applicant;

E.F.A. Anthony Merchant, Q.C., for the respondent.

This application was heard on April 25, 2001, in Chambers, before Cameron, J.A., of the Saskatchewan Court of Appeal, who delivered the following judgment on April 25, 2001.