Taylor v. Olson, (1994) 160 A.R. 373 (QBM)

• Court: Court of Queen's Bench of Alberta (Canada)
• Case Date: October 17, 1994
• Citations: (1994), 160 A.R. 373 (QBM)

Taylor v. Olson (1994), 160 A.R. 373 (QBM)

MLB headnote and full text

Bruce Taylor (plaintiff) v. James Paul Olson (defendant)

(Action No. 9203-04579)

Indexed As: Taylor v. Olson

Alberta Court of Queen's Bench

Judicial District of Edmonton

Funduk, Master in Chambers

October 17, 1994.

Summary:

Taylor applied for an order requiring Olson to produce two letters. Olson had claimed privilege for the letters in his affidavit of documents. Taylor also applied for an order re­quiring Olson's insurer to produce docu­ments it had in its pos­session.

A Master of the Alberta Court of Queen's Bench dismissed Taylor's application.

Practice - Topic 4578

Discovery - What documents must be produced - Privileged documents - Docu­ments prepared in contemplation of litiga­tion (incl. "litigation privileged") - Taylor applied for an order, inter alia, requiring Olson to produce two letters - Olson had claimed privilege for the letters in his affi­da­vit of documents - A Master of the Alberta Court of Queen's Bench dismissed Taylor's application - The Master stated that the dominant purpose for the creation of the letters was to "defend civil litigation then existing" - Therefore, the letters were "liti­gation privileged" - See paragraphs 2 to 22.

Practice - Topic 4610

Discovery - Production of documents by nonparties - Insurer's records - Taylor sued Olson - Taylor applied for an order, inter alia, requiring Olson's insurer to produce certain docu­ments it had in its possession - A Master of the Alberta Court of Queen's Bench held that non­parties would only be ordered to produce documents when it was shown that the document did exist and that it could not be obtained by other means - Taylor was unable to show either require­ment - The Master stated that he was clearly on a "fishing expedi­tion" and dis­missed the application - See paragraphs 25 to 37.

Cases Noticed:

Opron Construction Co. v. Alberta (1989), 100 A.R. 58 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 18].

Guinness Peat Properties v. Fitzroy Robinson Partnership, [1987] 1 W.L.R. 1027 (C.A.), dist. [para. 23].

Esso Resources Canada Ltd. et al. v. Stearns Catalytic Ltd. et al. (1990), 108 A.R. 161 (C.A.), folld. [para. 30].

Capital City Savings and Credit Union Ltd. v. Hadley Mechanical Services Ltd. et al. (1990), 103 A.R. 290 (Q.B. Master), refd to. [para. 36].

Counsel:

R. Kisilevich (Weary & Co.), for the plaintiff;

B. King (Cruickshank Karvellas), for the defendant;

R. Corrigan (Emery Jamieson), for the insurer.

This application was heard before Funduk, Master in Chambers, of the Alberta Court of Queen's Bench, Judicial District of Edmonton, who delivered the following judgment on October 17, 1994.