What is the state of the law on an undertaking of confidentiality?

Alberta, Canada


The following excerpt is from Cheyne v. Alberta, 2003 ABQB 244 (CanLII):

In Schreiber v. Canada (Attorney General) 2000 ABQB 536, Burrows J. characterised the policy reasons underlying the undertaking of confidentiality in the following way, at para. 12: The requirement that a litigant submit to discovery is an intrusion on the litigant’s interest in privacy and confidentiality of private information. That intrusion is permitted in order to ensure that there is full disclosure, and therefore a better chance of a just result, in the action in which the discovery occurs. The implied undertaking exists to limit the effect of the intrusion by ensuring that the information is used only for the purpose for which the litigant is obliged to provide it.

Other Questions


What is the current state of the law on an implied undertaking of confidentiality in discovery evidence? (British Columbia, Canada)
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? (British Columbia, Canada)
What is the state of the law on confidentiality of confidential documents? (British Columbia, Canada)
What is the current state of the law on confidentiality? (British Columbia, Canada)
What is the current state of the law on confidentiality in personal injury cases? (Saskatchewan, Canada)
Is there an implied undertaking of confidentiality over documents that are required to be produced by statute or as part of a proceeding? (British Columbia, Canada)
Is there an implied undertaking as to the confidentiality of evidence obtained in the course of discovery in a civil suit? (British Columbia, Canada)
Is there an implied undertaking of confidentiality associated with statements given in other proceedings? (Alberta, Canada)
What is the scope of the implied undertaking in the context of an implied undertaking? (British Columbia, Canada)
Can a state be granted state immunity in respect of its violations of international humanitarian law in Italy? (Canada (Federal), Canada)