Solosky v. Canada, (1979) 30 N.R. 380 (SCC)
Judge | Laskin, C.J.C., Martland, Ritchie, Pigeon, Dickson, Beetz, Estey, Pratte and McIntyre, JJ. |
Court | Supreme Court of Canada |
Case Date | December 21, 1979 |
Jurisdiction | Canada (Federal) |
Citations | (1979), 30 N.R. 380 (SCC);4 WCB 177;1979 CanLII 188 (SCC);16 CR (3d) 294;[1980] 1 SCR 821;[1979] ACS no 130;[1979] SCJ No 130 (QL);30 NR 380;105 DLR (3d) 745;50 CCC (2d) 495;[1980] 1 SCR 783;1979 CanLII 9 (SCC) |
Solosky v. Can. (1979), 30 N.R. 380 (SCC)
MLB headnote and full text
Solosky v. Government of Canada
Indexed As: Solosky v. Canada
Supreme Court of Canada
Laskin, C.J.C., Martland, Ritchie, Pigeon, Dickson, Beetz, Estey, Pratte and McIntyre, JJ.
December 21, 1979.
Summary:
This case arose out of the action by an inmate of a penitentiary for a declaration that correspondence by mail to his lawyer be forwarded unopened. The Federal Court of Canada, Trial Division, dismissed the inmate's action. The inmate appealed.
The Federal Court of Appeal in a judgment reported 22 N.R. 34 dismissed the appeal. The Federal Court of Appeal held that the inmate was not entitled to the declaratory judgment asked for, because the solicitor-client privilege extended only to communications for the purpose of advice and not to all communications for any purpose. The inmate appealed.
The Supreme Court of Canada dismissed the appeal. The Supreme Court of Canada held that the solicitor-client privilege respecting the inmate's letters to and from his lawyer must be balanced against the penitentiary's interest in security and set out guidelines for the screening of the inmate's letters to and from his lawyer.
Evidence - Topic 4241
Witnesses - Privilege - Lawyer-client communications - Extent of privilege - General - The Supreme Court of Canada discussed the origin and development of the solicitor-client privilege and held that it extends only to communications for the purpose of advice and not to all communications for any purpose - The Supreme Court of Canada discussed the extent of and exceptions to the privilege - See paragraphs 21 to 30.
Practice - Topic 5652
Judgments - Declaratory judgments - When available - The Supreme Court of Canada discussed the jurisdiction of the courts in granting declaratory relief - The Supreme Court of Canada held that the court may grant a declaratory judgment in its discretion when it has been shown that the dispute between the parties is real and that a declaration is capable of settling the issues between the parties - See paragraphs 9 to 20.
Cases Noticed:
Russian Commercial and Industrial Bank v. British Bank for Foreign Trade Ltd., [1921] 2 A.C. 438, appld. [para. 12].
Pyx Granite Co. Ltd. v. Ministry of Housing and Local Government, [1958] 1 Q.B. 554, rev'd [1960] A.C. 260, appld. [para. 13].
Dickson v. Pharmaceutical Society, [1970] A.C. 403 (H.L.), appld. [para. 14].
Mellstrom v. Garner, [1970] 1 W.L.R. 603, dist. [para. 15].
Director of Investigation and Research and Shell Canada Ltd., Re (1975), 22 C.C.C.(2d) 70, appld. [para. 21].
Berd v. Lovelace (1577), 21 E.R. 33, refd to. [para. 22].
Dennis v. Codrington (1580), 21 E.R. 53, refd to. [para. 22].
Greenough v. Gaskell (1833), 39 E.R. 618, appld. [para. 22].
Anderson v. Bank of British Columbia (1876), 2 Ch.D. 644, 649, appld. [para. 22].
O'Shea v. Woods, [1891] P. 286, appld. [para. 24].
R. v. Cox and Railton (1884), 14 Q.B.D. 153, consd. [para. 24].
Director of Investigation and Research and Canada Safeway Ltd., Re (1972), 26 D.L.R.(3d) 745 (B.C.S.C.), consd. [para. 25].
Presswood et al. and International Chemalloy Corp., Re (1976), 65 D.L.R. (3d) 228 (Ont. H.C.), consd. [para. 25].
Borden and Elliott and the Queen, Re (1976), 30 C.C.C.(2d) 337, affd. (1975), 30 C.C.C.(2d) 345 (Ont. C.A.), consd. [para. 25].
Re BX Development Inc. and the Queen (1976), 31 C.C.C.(2d) 14 (B.C.C.A.), consd. [para. 25].
Re B and the Queen (1977), 36 C.C.C.(2d) 235 (Ont. Prov. Ct.), consd. [para. 25].
Prata v. Minister of Manpower and Immigration (1975), 3 N.R. 484; [1976] 1 S.C.R. 376, appld. [para. 32].
Statutes Noticed:
Canadian Bill of Rights, R.S.C. 1970, App. III, sect. 1(b), sect. 1(d), sect. 2(c)(ii) [para. 3].
Penitentiary Act, R.S.C. 1970, c. P-6, sect. 29(1), sect. 29(3) [para. 2].
Penitentiary Service Regulations, S.O.R./62-90, sect. 1.12(1), sect. 2.17, sect. 2.18 [para. 3].
Supreme Court Act, R.S.C. 1970, c. S-19, sect. 50 [para. 20].
Authors and Works Noticed:
Chassé, The Solicitor-Client Privilege and Search Warrants (1977), 36 C.R.N.S. 349 [para. 26].
de Smith, Judicial Review of Administrative Action (3rd Ed. 1973), p. 431 [para. 20].
Hudson, Declaratory Judgments in Theoretical Cases: The Reality of the Dispute (1977), 3 Dal.L.J. 706 [para. 16].
Kasting, Recent Developments in the Law of Solicitor-Client Privilege (1978), 24 McGill L.J. 115 [para. 26].
Counsel:
Ronald Price, Q.C., and David P. Cole, for the appellant;
E. Bowie and J.-Paul Malette, for the respondent.
This case was heard on June 13, 1979, at Ottawa, Ontario, before LASKIN, C.J.C., MARTLAND, RITCHIE, PIGEON, DICKSON, BEETZ, ESTEY, PRATTE and McINTYRE, JJ., of the Supreme Court of Canada.
On December 21, 1979, the judgment of the Supreme Court of Canada was delivered and the following opinions were filed:
DICKSON, J. - See paragraphs 1 to 42;
ESTEY, J. - See paragraph 43.
LASKIN, C.J.C., MARTLAND, RITCHIE, PIGEON, BEETZ, PRATTE and McINTYRE, JJ., concurred with DICKSON, J.
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Geary v. Edmonton Remand Centre (Director) et al., (2004) 350 A.R. 143 (QB)
...5]. Martineau v. Matsqui Institution Disciplinary Board, [1980] 1 S.C.R. 602 ; 30 N.R. 119 , refd to. [para. 5]. Solosky v. Canada, [1980] 1 S.C.R. 821; 30 N.R. 380 , refd to. [para. Raymond v. Honey, [1982] 1 All E.R. 756 , refd to. [para. 5]. Sauvé v. Canada (Chief Electoral Officer) ......
-
General Accident Assurance Co. et al. v. Chrusz et al., (1999) 124 O.A.C. 356 (CA)
... [1991] 2 S.C.R. 353 ; 127 N.R. 241 ; 125 A.R. 81 ; 14 W.A.C. 81 ; 81 D.L.R.(4th) 211 , refd to. [para. 92]. Solosky v. Canada, [1980] 1 S.C.R. 821; 30 N.R. 380 ; 50 C.C.C.(2d) 495 , refd to. [para. 92]. L.L.A. v. Beharriell, [1995] 4 S.C.R. 536 ; 190 N.R. 329 ; 88 O.A.C. 241 ; 10......
-
Daniels c. Canada (Affaires Indiennes et du Nord canadien),
...C.N.L.R. 13.CONSIDERED:Daniels v. Canada (Minister of Indian Affairs and North-ern Development), 2008 FC 823 ; Solosky v. The Queen, [1980] 1 S.C.R. 821, (1979), 105 D.L.R. (3d) 745 , 50 C.C.C. (2d) 495; Manitoba Metis Federation Inc. v. Canada (Attorney General), 2007 MBQB 293 (CanLII)......
-
R. v. Campbell (J.) and Shirose (S.), (1999) 237 N.R. 86 (SCC)
...261 (B.C.S.C.), refd to. [para. 53]. R. v. Ladouceur, [1992] B.C.J. No. 2854 (S.C.), refd to. [para. 53]. Solosky v. Canada, [1980] 1 S.C.R. 821; 30 N.R. 380 ; 105 D.L.R.(3d) 745 ; 50 C.C.C.(2d) 495 , refd to. [para. R. v. Cox and Railton (1884), 14 Q.B.D. 153 , refd to. [para. 56]. O'......
-
Geary v. Edmonton Remand Centre (Director) et al., (2004) 350 A.R. 143 (QB)
...5]. Martineau v. Matsqui Institution Disciplinary Board, [1980] 1 S.C.R. 602 ; 30 N.R. 119 , refd to. [para. 5]. Solosky v. Canada, [1980] 1 S.C.R. 821; 30 N.R. 380 , refd to. [para. Raymond v. Honey, [1982] 1 All E.R. 756 , refd to. [para. 5]. Sauvé v. Canada (Chief Electoral Officer) ......
-
General Accident Assurance Co. et al. v. Chrusz et al., (1999) 124 O.A.C. 356 (CA)
... [1991] 2 S.C.R. 353 ; 127 N.R. 241 ; 125 A.R. 81 ; 14 W.A.C. 81 ; 81 D.L.R.(4th) 211 , refd to. [para. 92]. Solosky v. Canada, [1980] 1 S.C.R. 821; 30 N.R. 380 ; 50 C.C.C.(2d) 495 , refd to. [para. 92]. L.L.A. v. Beharriell, [1995] 4 S.C.R. 536 ; 190 N.R. 329 ; 88 O.A.C. 241 ; 10......
-
Daniels c. Canada (Affaires Indiennes et du Nord canadien),
...C.N.L.R. 13.CONSIDERED:Daniels v. Canada (Minister of Indian Affairs and North-ern Development), 2008 FC 823 ; Solosky v. The Queen, [1980] 1 S.C.R. 821, (1979), 105 D.L.R. (3d) 745 , 50 C.C.C. (2d) 495; Manitoba Metis Federation Inc. v. Canada (Attorney General), 2007 MBQB 293 (CanLII)......
-
R. v. Campbell (J.) and Shirose (S.), (1999) 237 N.R. 86 (SCC)
...261 (B.C.S.C.), refd to. [para. 53]. R. v. Ladouceur, [1992] B.C.J. No. 2854 (S.C.), refd to. [para. 53]. Solosky v. Canada, [1980] 1 S.C.R. 821; 30 N.R. 380 ; 105 D.L.R.(3d) 745 ; 50 C.C.C.(2d) 495 , refd to. [para. R. v. Cox and Railton (1884), 14 Q.B.D. 153 , refd to. [para. 56]. O'......
-
Court Of Appeal Summaries (September 23-27)
...Keywords: Insurance, Coverage, Civil Procedure, Applications, Orders, Declarations, Multiplicity of Proceedings, Solosky v. The Queen, [1980] 1 SCR 821, Courts of Justice Act, RSO 1990, c C43, s. 138 Segura Mosquera v. Ottawa (City), 2019 ONCA 760 Keywords: Civil Procedure, Appeals, Perfect......
-
Court Of Appeal Summaries (July 18, 2022 ' July 22, 2022)
..., Victorian Townhomes (Burlington) II Limited Partnership v. Mutual Trust Co., [1995] O.J. No. 1844 (C.A.), Solosky v. The Queen, [1980] 1 S.C.R. 821, Daniels v. Canada (Indian Affairs and Northern Development), 2016 SCC 12 , Middlesex Centre (Municipality) v. MacMillan, 2016 ONCA 475 ,......
-
Court Of Appeal Summaries (May 15, 2023 ' May 19, 2023)
...v. Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce, 2022 ONCA 115 , Nortel Networks Corporation (Re), 2013 ONCA 518 , Solosky v. The Queen, [1980] 1 S.C.R. 821, Grain Farmers of Ontario v. Ontario (Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change), 2016 ONCA 283 , J.N. v. Durham Regional Police Service......
-
Reinforcing The Primacy Of Privilege
...pp. 130-32. Descôteaux v. Mierzwinski, [1982] 1 S.C.R. 860 [Descôteaux]; R. v. Campbell, [1999] 1 S.C.R. 565 . Canada v. Solosky, [1980] 1 S.C.R. 821; Descôteaux; McClure; Lavallee, Rackel & Heintz v. Canada (A.G.), [2002] 3 S.C.R. 209 Perell J., "A Privilege Primer", at p. 3, citi......
-
Procedural Fairness as a Principle of Fundamental Justice
...of Law Societies of Canada , 2015 SCC 7 at para 120 [ Federation of Law Societies ], McLachlin CJC concurring. 45 Solosky v Canada , [1980] 1 SCR 821 at 837. These conditions have often been reiterated; see, for instance, Pritchard v Ontario (Human Rights Commission) , 2004 SCC 31 at para 1......
-
Witness Competence, Compellability and Privilege
...R v McClure , 2001 SCC 14 at paras 31-33. 37 Lavallee, Rackel & Heintz v Canada (AG) , 2002 SCC 61 at para 16. 38 Solosky v The Queen , [1980] 1 SCR 821 at 837, 1979 CanLII 9. 39 R v McClure , 2001 SCC 14 at para 34. 40 Lavallee, Rackel & Heintz v Canada (AG) , 2002 SCC 61 at para 36. 41 La......
-
Table of cases
...[1999] SCJ No 15 ......................................................................................... 282 Solosky v Canada (1979), [1980] 1 SCR 821, 105 DLR (3d) 745 , [1979] SCJ No 130 ....................................................................................... 281 Sris......
-
Table of Cases
...SCC 16 ................................................................................................ 156 Canada v. Solosky (1979), [1980] 1 S.C.R. 821, 105 D.L.R. (3d) 745 , [1979] S.C.J. No. 130 .................................................................................... 196......