HUMAN RIGHTS |
Public Service Alliance of Canada v. Northwest Territories
A-638-00
2001 FCA 259, Evans J.A.
6/9/01
5 pp.
Appeal from Motions Judge's decision ((2000), 191 F.T.R. 266) granting in part motion for disclosure of contents of 20 documents referred to in document list produced by Government of Northwest Territories (GNWT) in course of proceedings before Canadian Human Rights Tribunal arising from pay equity complaint by PSAC--GNWT claimed immunity from disclosure on basis of Canada Evidence Act, s. 37--Motions Judge disallowed immunity claim with respect to 2 documents, allowed it with respect to one document and allowed claim with respect to portions of remaining 17 documents--CHRC, supporting PSAC, seeking full disclosure of all documents--Appeal dismissed--Counsel for appellant argued that, contrary to Motions Judge's assertion, fact document containing admission against interest not basis upon which claim for public interest immunity can be based--On contrary, such document should be disclosed, except for most pressing reasons--However, error not material as examination of documents indicating none constituted admission against interest--Counsel also argued government's interest in preserving bargaining position with its employees not in law capable of supporting claim for public interest immunity--However, for purpose of public interest immunity, categories of public interest that may be damaged by disclosure of documents not closed--Court not prepared to say government can never establish public interest immunity claim by invoking possibility that public interest will be harmed by disclosure of its future negotiating strategy with its employees, or position government proposing to adopt on certain issues in upcoming negotiations--Once accepted that protection of GNWT's bargaining strategy in law capable of supporting claim for public interest immunity, then matter for Motions Judge's discretion whether harm that may be caused by disclosure outweighing damage to due administration of justice before material in dispute not disclosed--Motions Judge correctly identified factors adumbrated in Carey v. Ontario, [1986] 2 S.C.R. 637, that judges must consider in weighing these competing heads of public interest--Further, upon reading in entirety reasons of Motions Judge and record, including confidential parts of it, Motions Judge did not commit any error warranting intervention of Court--Noted that disputed material appearing to have only marginal relevance to merits of pay equity claim--Canada Evidence Act, R.S.C., 1985, c. C-5, s. 37.