In Ludmer v. Ludmer 2011 ONSC 6116 Perkins J. dealt with the issue of confidentiality regarding documents for a matrimonial property issue. In commenting on the non-party’s affidavit resisting disclosure Perkins J. stated at para. 19: The father contended that there were sensitive and private business or estate matters at issue, but other than broad and conclusory statements in his affidavit, there was no indication of what the matters might be or why they might be sensitive.
In Matthys v. Foody 2009 Carswell Ont. 3791 Mackinnon J. reviewed the purpose of Family Law Rule 19 and stated: In my view the words also encompass the ability of a party to make a formal request for documents from a non-party with the expectation that the request, reasonably made, will be granted. A non-party should be expected to entertain a reasonable request with knowledge of the law, including the courts ability on proper notice to order production from the non-party pursuant to Family Law Rule 19(11). Legal 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.alexsei.com.