Case information

None.

Case summaries are prepared by the Office of the Registrar of the Supreme Court of Canada (Law Branch). Please note that summaries are not provided to the Judges of the Court. They are placed on the Court file and website for information purposes only.

Quebec Charter - Freedom of expression - Freedom of the press - Confidentiality of media sources - Civil procedure - Admissibility of evidence - Exclusion of evidence disclosing identity of confidential source - Whether a journalist in Quebec enjoys a right not to be required to disclose the identity of a confidential source, in particular in the context of a civil proceeding, and if so, how that right is to be balanced against the ability of the party who is seeking disclosure to obtain information that it considers relevant to the proceeding - Whether the Wigmore doctrine for “case by case” privilege applies in Quebec to determine whether a journalist can be compelled in civil litigation to disclose the identity of a confidential source, and if so, whether the application of the doctrine is modified in light of the constitutional landscape - Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms, R.S.Q., c. C-12, s. 3 - Civil Code of Quebec, S.Q. 1991, c. 64, art. 2858.

The Commission of Inquiry into the Sponsorship Program and Advertising Activities serves as the backdrop to this appeal. In 2005, the Attorney General of Canada instituted claims in the amount of 63 million dollars against various defendants, including the Respondent Polygone, seeking the resolution of certain contracts as well as the reimbursement of sums paid pursuant to those contracts. The trial in this civil recovery action is scheduled to begin in October 2009 before the Superior Court of Quebec. In its defence, Polygone seeks to prove that the federal government had knowledge of the affair prior to 2002, and that as a result, the government’s claims are prescribed. Specifically, Polygone seeks to prove that a government employee had leaked information to a journalist employed by the Appellant, Globe and Mail, prior to the year 2002. At Polygone’s request, the Superior Court ordered that certain individuals, mostly current and former government employees, state in writing and under oath, whether they had given any information to the Globe and Mail’s reporter on the issue. The Globe and Mail filed a motion in revocation of judgment to have that order set aside. It argued, among other things, that the order violated its right to freedom of expression, particularly its right to protect its confidential sources. At the hearing before the Superior Court on the motion in revocation, the Globe and Mail objected to certain questions directed at its journalist on the basis that his sources were confidential. The Superior Court dismissed the objections.