Une analyse policière de la preuve n'a pas à être divulguée, considérant qu'elle n'est pas un fruit de l'enquête

R. v. Brennan Paving and Construction Ltd., 1998 CanLII 926 (ON CA)

Lien vers la décision

[17]            After the investigator completed his investigation, he prepared a memorandum summarizing the evidence he had gathered. His purpose in doing so was to obtain a legal opinion from Ministry counsel as to whether charges should be laid. This procedure accorded with Ministry of Labour policy.

[18]            There is no indication that the memorandum in question contained material inconsistencies or additional facts not already disclosed to Brennan pursuant to the Crown’s disclosure obligations. As such, the investigator’s memorandum did not constitute the fruits of his investigation. Rather, it was a summary of information which Brennan already possessed. Properly characterized, the memorandum was work product which the Crown would not ordinarily be obliged to disclose.

[19]            Apart from Brennan’s unfounded submission that the memorandum constituted the fruits of the investigation, no other head of relevance was suggested. Accordingly, the Crown was not obliged to disclose the memorandum and the Justice of the Peace and Judge Laing erred in concluding otherwise.

[20]            With respect to the second memorandum, namely, the legal response prepared by Ministry counsel, on appeal, counsel for the respondent conceded that the Justice of the Peace erred in ordering its production. We agree. There was no basis in fact or law warranting the production of this document.