Generally speaking, the considerations for the court on this type of application include
the probative value of the information sought, privacy concerns, potential prejudice to the plaintiff and proportionality: Cui at para. 9.
Not exact matches
In US v. Mitchell, No. 09 - 3041, the court
of appeals affirmed defendant's conviction for money laundering conspiracy, holding that 1) the indictment was not so defective that defendant could not have reasonably understood the offense for which he was charged; and 2) defendant did not show that the danger
of unfair prejudice substantially outweighed the
probative value of certain tax
information.
[57] The
information sought by the defence in this case may have significant
probative value in relation to the plaintiff's past and future wage loss, and the
value of production is not outweighed by competing interests such as confidentiality and the time and expense required for the party to produce the documents.
The judge or justice must also take the following factors into consideration when making their determination; the extent to which the records are required for the accused to make a full and complete defense, the
probative value of the records, the nature and extent
of the reasonable expectation
of privacy with respect to the personal
information contained in the record, whether production
of the record is based on a discriminatory belief or bias, the potential prejudice to personal dignity the complainant or witness will experience if the record is produced, society's interest in encouraging individuals to obtain treatment after being sexually assaulted, society's interest in encouraging sexual assault victims to report the assault and the effect
of the determination on the integrity
of the trial process.
The judge shall take the following factors into consideration: the
probative value of the records, the extent to which the records are needed for the accused to make a full defense, whether production
of the record is based on a discriminatory belief or bias, the nature and extent
of the reasonable expectation
of privacy with respect to the
information contained in the record, the potential prejudice to personal dignity the complainant or witness would suffer if the record was produced, society's interest in encouraging sexual assault victims to come forward, society's interest in encouraging individuals to obtain treatment after being sexually assaulted and the effect
of the determination on the integrity
of the trial process.
If I am wrong on the question
of probative value, then I find that the production
of this
information, including all that would be entailed in protecting the privacy rights
of third parties, is not proportionate to the issues to be determined at trial.