Does litigation privilege apply to an insurer's investigation file?
Ontario, Canada
The following excerpt is from St. Lewis v. Rancourt, 2013 ONSC 3334 (CanLII):
The court in Mamaca v. Coseco Insurance Company, 2007 CanLII 54963 (ONSC), addressed litigation privilege within the context of an insurer’s investigation file. The court stated that the party seeking disclosure of information protected by litigation privilege has the onus to establish prima facie actionable misconduct. That court further stated that the importance of the information to the plaintiff’s claim, such as bad faith, is subservient to establish litigation privilege.
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.
Other Questions
Does litigation privilege protect an insurance adjuster's investigation and file? (Ontario, Canada)
Can an insurer deny coverage under a policy issued by a new insurer because the insurer was aware of a potential claim in an underlying action brought against the insureds? (Ontario, Canada)
Does solicitor-client privilege extend beyond litigation privilege? (Ontario, Canada)
Does litigation privilege end when the litigation ends? (Ontario, Canada)
Is litigation privilege applicable to documents prepared as a result of an investigation into the accident and the claim? (Ontario, Canada)
Is an insurer's obligation to pay insurance monies to an insured a debt that can be garnished? (Ontario, Canada)
What privilege does solicitor privilege apply to confidential communications between solicitor and client? (Ontario, Canada)
Is there any relevant factual evidence in the insurer’s file for subrogated title insurance? (Ontario, Canada)
What is implied waiver of privilege where the holder of privilege takes some action or position inconsistent with the maintenance of privilege? (Ontario, Canada)
If an insurance policy question is ambiguous and open to multiple interpretations and leads an applicant for insurance coverage to provide incorrect information, must the answer be resolved as against the insurer? (Ontario, Canada)
