Does a party have to sign an implied undertaking of confidentiality to the court not to use the documents or information provided on discovery for purposes of litigation?

The petitioner submits that the law generally imposes on the parties to civil litigation an implied undertaking of confidentiality to the court not to use the documents or information provided on discovery for any purpose other than the litigation in which it was produced. The principles underlying the rationale for the implied undertaking of confidentiality were set out in Juman v. Doucette, 2008 SCC 8 at paras. 24-26 [Juman]: 24. ... pre-trial discovery is an invasion of a private right to be left alone with your thoughts and papers, however embarrassing, defamatory or scandalous. At least one side in every lawsuit is a reluctant participant. Yet a proper pre-trial discovery is essential to prevent surprise or "litigation by ambush", to encourage settlement once the facts are known, and to narrow issues even where settlement proves unachievable.... 25. The public interest in getting at the truth in a civil action outweighs the examinee's privacy interest, but the latter is nevertheless entitled to a measure of protection. The answers and documents are compelled by statute solely for the purpose of the civil action and the law thus requires that the invasion of privacy should generally be limited to the level of disclosure necessary to satisfy that purpose and that purpose alone. Although the present case involves the issue of self-incrimination of the appellant, that element is not a necessary requirement for protection.... 26. There is a second rationale supporting the existence of an implied undertaking. A litigant who has some assurance that the documents and answers will not be used for a purpose collateral or ulterior to the proceedings in which they are demanded will be encouraged to provide a more complete and candid discovery....