0
Preparing for ConstructionLitigationIn an Electronic AgeBy: Karen GroulxD +1 416 863 4697karen.groulx@dentons.com22 May 20...
eDiscovery:17 May 2013 Dentons Canada LLP Document reference # 2• Single most significant change to the legal system in th...
17 May 2013 Dentons Canada LLP Document reference # 3• Email, Twitter and text messaging…
ESI = Volume17 May 2013 Dentons Canada LLP Document reference # 4• 294 billion emails are sent each day. That’s 2.8 millio...
Why do we care about ESI?17 May 2013 Dentons Canada LLP Document reference # 5• 90% of ESI never gets printed• You may be ...
Document Types and Sources17 May 2013 Dentons Canada LLP Document reference # 6• A typical construction project generates ...
What is an Electronic Document?17 May 2013 Dentons Canada LLP Document reference # 7• Electronically stored information (“...
What is different about ESI?17 May 2013 Dentons Canada LLP Document reference # 8• Volume• Disorganization• Duplication• T...
17 May 2013 Dentons Canada LLP Document reference # 9The average hard drivecan store a millionpages or more=
Volume17 May 2013 Dentons Canada LLP Document reference # 10“He who must search for a needle in ahaystack is likely to end...
Duplication17 May 2013 Dentons Canada LLP Document reference # 11• An email sent or cc’d to five people will reside in fiv...
Duplication17 May 2013 Dentons Canada LLP Document reference # 12• Deleted doesn’t mean gone• An email deleted from Trash ...
What is metadata?17 May 2013 Dentons Canada LLP Document reference # 13• Data about data• Evidence stored electronically t...
When is metadata significant?17 May 2013 Dentons Canada LLP Document reference # 14• If the origin, use, distribution,dest...
Connect Individual to ESI17 May 2013 Dentons Canada LLP Document reference # 15• Oracle case: An email allegedly sent by a...
If hidden, is it really gone?17 May 2013 Dentons Canada LLP Document reference # 16• Washington Post publishes Washington ...
Locations of ESI17 May 2013 Dentons Canada LLP Document reference # 17Sent to Offsite StorageSend email to laptopBacked up...
Sedona Principles17 May 2013 Dentons Canada LLP Document reference # 18
Duty to Preserve17 May 2013 Dentons Canada LLP Document reference # 19• Sedona Principle #3: As soon as litigation is reas...
When does Duty to Preserve Arise?17 May 2013 Dentons Canada LLP Document reference # 20• Reasonable anticipation of litiga...
Timing17 May 2013 Dentons Canada LLP Document reference # 21• Preservation obligation can arise prior to litigation, but a...
Clarity is Essential17 May 2013 Dentons Canada LLP Document reference # 22• If you intend to create a preservation obligat...
Case Study Example17 May 2013 Dentons Canada LLP Document reference # 23• Claim by GC, Bemar, against City for breach of c...
Principle of Proportionality in Canadian Law17 May 2013 Dentons Canada LLP Document reference # 24• Sedona Principle #2: S...
Proportionality and the CLA17 May 2013 Dentons Canada LLP Document reference # 25• Proportionality is the governing princi...
The Litigation Hold17 May 2013 Dentons Canada LLP Document reference # 26• Commentary to Sedona Principle #3:• Prominent n...
A Preservation Notice Should:17 May 2013 Dentons Canada LLP Document reference # 27• Summarize key issues• Explain duty to...
Principle of Proportionality in Canadian Law17 May 2013 Dentons Canada LLP Document reference # 28• How much is too much? ...
Need for and Scope of Preservation17 May 2013 Dentons Canada LLP Document reference # 29• Consider:• Whether to use electr...
Failing to Preserve17 May 2013 Dentons Canada LLP Document reference # 30• Spoliation=Destruction, mutilation,alteration o...
Spoliation17 May 2013 Dentons Canada LLP Document reference # 31• Sedona principle #11: Sanctions should be considered whe...
The High Cost of Failure17 May 2013 Dentons Canada LLP Document reference # 32• Two kinds of failure• Failure to preserv• ...
Consequences17 May 2013 Dentons Canada LLP Document reference # 33• Monetary sanctions• Adverse inference instructions• Di...
The Process17 May 2013 Dentons Canada LLP Document reference # 34
Case Scenario17 May 2013 Dentons Canada LLP Document reference # 35• Voluminous design documentation, scheduling data, rou...
Case Scenario17 May 2013 Dentons Canada LLP Document reference # 36• During performance, there are significant delays and ...
Framing the Issues17 May 2013 Dentons Canada LLP Document reference # 37• At what point do you have to “hold” electronic d...
Documents Types and Sources17 May 2013 Dentons Canada LLP Document reference # 38• Interview IT• Systems in place• Backup ...
Working with IT17 May 2013 Dentons Canada LLP Document reference # 39• Client may wish their own IT to collect the data• M...
Where is it?17 May 2013 Dentons Canada LLP Document reference # 40• Data Map: a “map of the forest”• Used by counsel to pr...
Data Maps: user and group file shares17 May 2013 Dentons Canada LLP Document reference # 41• Server systems used• Size of ...
Talk to the people who know17 May 2013 Dentons Canada LLP Document reference # 42
17 May 2013 Dentons Canada LLP Document reference # 43• Interview key custodians• Network / username / email addresses• Pe...
The Collection Plan17 May 2013 Dentons Canada LLP Document reference # 44• Preserve all ESI in the format in which it isge...
Meet & Confer17 May 2013 Dentons Canada LLP Document reference # 45• Sedona Principle # 4• “Rule 29.1 is a new rule which ...
Work it Out17 May 2013 Dentons Canada LLP Document reference # 46• eDiscovery Rules are unique in explicit recognitionthat...
Best Practices to Contain Costs17 May 2013 Dentons Canada LLP Document reference # 47• At pleadings stage, focus on what i...
Sampling17 May 2013 Dentons Canada LLP Document reference # 48• Keyword searches: run a test search• If lots of irrelevant...
Practice Pointers17 May 2013 Dentons Canada LLP Document reference # 49• Keyword searching can be used as a relevance scre...
Keywords17 May 2013 Dentons Canada LLP Document reference # 50• Dispute re construction of Bronx Hall of Justice: issue in...
Difficulty of Keyword Searches17 May 2013 Dentons Canada LLP Document reference # 51• On construction projects, must ensur...
17 May 2013 Dentons Canada LLP Document reference # 52“This case is just the latest example of lawyers designing keywordse...
Keywords17 May 2013 Dentons Canada LLP Document reference # 53“This opinion should serve as a wake up call to the Bar in t...
Other Keyword Decisions17 May 2013 Dentons Canada LLP Document reference # 54• SEC v. Collin & Aikman – Court rejected SEC...
Costs of ESI Review17 May 2013 Dentons Canada LLP Document reference # 55• Adopt best practices around lawyer review (the ...
Cost Containment Policies17 May 2013 Dentons Canada LLP Document reference # 56• Use automated tools where appropriate• Wh...
Cost Containment Policies17 May 2013 Dentons Canada LLP Document reference # 57• Linear review v. clustering technologies•...
Costs of ESI Review17 May 2013 Dentons Canada LLP Document reference # 58• Use of clustering review tools can reduce cost ...
The Discovery Plan17 May 2013 Dentons Canada LLP Document reference # 59• Think of the Discovery Plan as an Action Plan• R...
The Discovery Plan00 Month 2013 Dentons Canada LLP Document reference # 60• Great Canadian Gaming Corporation v 1632842 On...
The Discovery Plan17 May 2013 Dentons Canada LLP Document reference # 61• Discovery plans can evolve as circumstances chan...
The Discovery Plan17 May 2013 Dentons Canada LLP Document reference # 62• Lecompte v. Doran, 2010 ONSC 6290:• Motion for f...
Form of Production17 May 2013 Dentons Canada LLP Document reference # 63• ESI is producible and compellable in discovery• ...
Judicial Analysis of Defensibility17 May 2013 Dentons Canada LLP Document reference # 64• Did counsel follow a reasonable ...
17 May 2013 Dentons Canada LLP Document reference # 65
Questions?By: Karen GroulxD +1 416 863 4697karen.groulx@dentons.comDentons Canada LLP66
The preceding presentationcontains examples of thekinds of issues companiesdealing with ConstructionLitigation could face....
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Preparing for Construction Litigation in a Electronic Age

305

Published on

In this presentation, Karen Groulx discusses Preparing for Construction Litigation in a Electronic Age. Topics include:

eDiscovery
ESI
Document Types and Sources
What is an Electronic Document?
What is different about ESI?
Volume
Duplication
What is metadata?
When is metadata significant?
Connect Individual to ESI
Locations of ESI
Sedona Principles - Duty to Preserve, Principle of Proportionality in Canadian Law, The Litigation Hold, Spoliation and Meet & Confer
Keywords
Costs of ESI Review
Cost Containment Policies
Costs of ESI Review
The Discovery Plan
Form of Production

Published in: Business, Technology
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
305
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
7
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Transcript of "Preparing for Construction Litigation in a Electronic Age"

  1. 1. Preparing for ConstructionLitigationIn an Electronic AgeBy: Karen GroulxD +1 416 863 4697karen.groulx@dentons.com22 May 2013Dentons Canada LLP
  2. 2. eDiscovery:17 May 2013 Dentons Canada LLP Document reference # 2• Single most significant change to the legal system in the last half century.
  3. 3. 17 May 2013 Dentons Canada LLP Document reference # 3• Email, Twitter and text messaging…
  4. 4. ESI = Volume17 May 2013 Dentons Canada LLP Document reference # 4• 294 billion emails are sent each day. That’s 2.8 million emails persecond.• In the time it takes you to read this sentence, some 20 million emailsentered cyberspace.• In 2012, the average corporate user will send and receive about 110email messages per day (Source: Radicati Group, Inc.)
  5. 5. Why do we care about ESI?17 May 2013 Dentons Canada LLP Document reference # 5• 90% of ESI never gets printed• You may be missing 90% of therelevant data!
  6. 6. Document Types and Sources17 May 2013 Dentons Canada LLP Document reference # 6• A typical construction project generates ESI from numerous differentsources• Email, Word, Excel, financial & accounting data, often in proprietary databases• AutoCAD drawings, Primavera P3, Expedition and other construction industryprograms• ESI stored in the on-board computer of heavy equipment
  7. 7. What is an Electronic Document?17 May 2013 Dentons Canada LLP Document reference # 7• Electronically stored information (“ESI”): only readable through the useof computers
  8. 8. What is different about ESI?17 May 2013 Dentons Canada LLP Document reference # 8• Volume• Disorganization• Duplication• Transient in nature• Hidden information (metadata)
  9. 9. 17 May 2013 Dentons Canada LLP Document reference # 9The average hard drivecan store a millionpages or more=
  10. 10. Volume17 May 2013 Dentons Canada LLP Document reference # 10“He who must search for a needle in ahaystack is likely to end up with theattitude that the needle is not worth thesearch.”-Justice Robert H. Jackson(1892-1954)
  11. 11. Duplication17 May 2013 Dentons Canada LLP Document reference # 11• An email sent or cc’d to five people will reside in five email boxes as wellas that of the sender• If forwarded to additional recipients, or responded to several times, theremay be more versions
  12. 12. Duplication17 May 2013 Dentons Canada LLP Document reference # 12• Deleted doesn’t mean gone• An email deleted from Trash will still be in Sent Items, recipient’s Inbox,email server, backup tapes
  13. 13. What is metadata?17 May 2013 Dentons Canada LLP Document reference # 13• Data about data• Evidence stored electronically that describes the characteristics, origins,usage and validity of other electronic evidence
  14. 14. When is metadata significant?17 May 2013 Dentons Canada LLP Document reference # 14• If the origin, use, distribution,destruction or integrity of ESI is inissue, the digital “DNA” of metadatais essential evidence that needs tobe preserved.
  15. 15. Connect Individual to ESI17 May 2013 Dentons Canada LLP Document reference # 15• Oracle case: An email allegedly sent by a manager when cell phonerecords showed “sender” was elsewhere and on the phone; “wrongfullyterminated” employee had his password
  16. 16. If hidden, is it really gone?17 May 2013 Dentons Canada LLP Document reference # 16• Washington Post publishes Washington Sniper’s letter with easilyremovable pdf redactions• Facebook/ConnectU confidential settlement revealed by removing pdfredactions from published hearing records
  17. 17. Locations of ESI17 May 2013 Dentons Canada LLP Document reference # 17Sent to Offsite StorageSend email to laptopBacked up to Memory CardMobileDeviceMemoryCardSynced with WorkstationLaptopHome ComputerRouterOffsite StorageTape LibraryBackup TapeServerServer BackupStored in Tape LibrarySlide courtesy of C. Rothman, Wortzman Nickle
  18. 18. Sedona Principles17 May 2013 Dentons Canada LLP Document reference # 18
  19. 19. Duty to Preserve17 May 2013 Dentons Canada LLP Document reference # 19• Sedona Principle #3: As soon as litigation is reasonably anticipated,parties must take reasonable and good faith steps to preserve potentiallyrelevant ESI• Automatic overwriting of backup tapes• Records management policies thatautomatically destroy data (emails)after a certain period
  20. 20. When does Duty to Preserve Arise?17 May 2013 Dentons Canada LLP Document reference # 20• Reasonable anticipation of litigation
  21. 21. Timing17 May 2013 Dentons Canada LLP Document reference # 21• Preservation obligation can arise prior to litigation, but analysis is fact-specific
  22. 22. Clarity is Essential17 May 2013 Dentons Canada LLP Document reference # 22• If you intend to create a preservation obligation, make the threat oflitigation explicit
  23. 23. Case Study Example17 May 2013 Dentons Canada LLP Document reference # 23• Claim by GC, Bemar, against City for breach of contract and damagesdue to counterclaim by City for deficiencies and delay• Arguable that numerous disputes between Bemar Ont. and City weresufficient to trigger preservation obligations• But upon termination of Bemar, City is obligated to issue an internalnotice to management and employees re procedures for litigation hold• Bemar Ont should do same
  24. 24. Principle of Proportionality in Canadian Law17 May 2013 Dentons Canada LLP Document reference # 24• Sedona Principle #2: Steps taken are to be proportionate, taking intoaccount:• Nature and scope of litigation;• Importance and complexity of issues;• Relevance of available ESI;• Its importance to the court’s adjudication;• Cost, burden & delay that may result
  25. 25. Proportionality and the CLA17 May 2013 Dentons Canada LLP Document reference # 25• Proportionality is the governing principal in the Construction Lien Act (Ex:Lecompte v. Doran)• Affidavits of Documents or Examinations for Discovery require leave ofCourt (Section 67(2))• Proportionality principle: relevance is not the only determining factor; cost& importance & money at stake matter
  26. 26. The Litigation Hold17 May 2013 Dentons Canada LLP Document reference # 26• Commentary to Sedona Principle #3:• Prominent notice and clear instructions of the legal hold should be provided torecipients• Sufficient detail• Whether there is a need to preserve in multiple locations• Caution not to alter, delete or destroy the ESI
  27. 27. A Preservation Notice Should:17 May 2013 Dentons Canada LLP Document reference # 27• Summarize key issues• Explain duty to preserve both paperand electronic records• Explain how to comply
  28. 28. Principle of Proportionality in Canadian Law17 May 2013 Dentons Canada LLP Document reference # 28• How much is too much? Is it just a fishing expedition?• Richelieu Hardware (2008) Ont. S.C.• Bishop v. Minichiello (2009), BCCA
  29. 29. Need for and Scope of Preservation17 May 2013 Dentons Canada LLP Document reference # 29• Consider:• Whether to use electronic search tools• Whether backup media is needed• Whether forensic mirror copies should be taken• What is actively being used and how to take a “snapshot” of this information• Whether documents created on older systems are still accessible• Whether forensic consultants or other experts are needed
  30. 30. Failing to Preserve17 May 2013 Dentons Canada LLP Document reference # 30• Spoliation=Destruction, mutilation,alteration or concealment ofevidence
  31. 31. Spoliation17 May 2013 Dentons Canada LLP Document reference # 31• Sedona principle #11: Sanctions should be considered where a party willbe materially prejudiced by failure to preserve, collect, review or produceESI
  32. 32. The High Cost of Failure17 May 2013 Dentons Canada LLP Document reference # 32• Two kinds of failure• Failure to preserv• Over-preservation
  33. 33. Consequences17 May 2013 Dentons Canada LLP Document reference # 33• Monetary sanctions• Adverse inference instructions• Dismissal of case• Brandon Heating & Plumbing v. Max Systems
  34. 34. The Process17 May 2013 Dentons Canada LLP Document reference # 34
  35. 35. Case Scenario17 May 2013 Dentons Canada LLP Document reference # 35• Voluminous design documentation, scheduling data, routine projectrecords and email are hosted in a collaborative project managementdatabase• All data are in electronic form, but involve a number of different softwareand hardware platforms
  36. 36. Case Scenario17 May 2013 Dentons Canada LLP Document reference # 36• During performance, there are significant delays and changes to thework• Claims are submitted.
  37. 37. Framing the Issues17 May 2013 Dentons Canada LLP Document reference # 37• At what point do you have to “hold” electronic data?• What data has to be held?• How do you organize your electronic records for production?• Who owns or is responsible for collaborative data?• In what format should you produce records?• How to you satisfy your obligations in a reasonable and cost-effectiveway?
  38. 38. Documents Types and Sources17 May 2013 Dentons Canada LLP Document reference # 38• Interview IT• Systems in place• Backup procedures• Document retention/recordsmanagement policies• Automated processes
  39. 39. Working with IT17 May 2013 Dentons Canada LLP Document reference # 39• Client may wish their own IT to collect the data• More cost-effective• Preserve confidentiality• Security concerns• Why this may not be the best idea• Clients often underestimate resources required• IT do not understand forensic aspects of data collection• Identification/collection process may be subject to examination
  40. 40. Where is it?17 May 2013 Dentons Canada LLP Document reference # 40• Data Map: a “map of the forest”• Used by counsel to prepare for meet & confer• Organizations should have a general data map and keep it up to date
  41. 41. Data Maps: user and group file shares17 May 2013 Dentons Canada LLP Document reference # 41• Server systems used• Size of current shared network files• Where work product is saved• Central access to desktop work files
  42. 42. Talk to the people who know17 May 2013 Dentons Canada LLP Document reference # 42
  43. 43. 17 May 2013 Dentons Canada LLP Document reference # 43• Interview key custodians• Network / username / email addresses• Peripherals (PDA, cell, etc.)• What files are on their workstations?• Personal network storage• Shared network storage• Remote access
  44. 44. The Collection Plan17 May 2013 Dentons Canada LLP Document reference # 44• Preserve all ESI in the format in which it isgenerated• Production of design and schedule data in theirproprietary format is standard• The format for production of their data ought to bediscussed and negotiated
  45. 45. Meet & Confer17 May 2013 Dentons Canada LLP Document reference # 45• Sedona Principle # 4• “Rule 29.1 is a new rule which establishes an obligation to meet, conferand to create a discovery plan before production and discovery getunderway… Discovery planning is intended to permit the parties to mapout the most efficient and effective way to organize the production anddiscovery needs of the particular action having regard to the complexityof the records, the issues in dispute and the amounts at stake. It cannotbe an adversarial exercise. Planning is also intended to minimize theneed for court intervention”• Lecompte v. Doran, 2010 ONSC 6290
  46. 46. Work it Out17 May 2013 Dentons Canada LLP Document reference # 46• eDiscovery Rules are unique in explicit recognitionthat you can agree to limits on the process• Judges want parties to work issues out and areadopting parties’ agreements as “the rules”• Opportunities are greatest at the beginning of a case• Times are changing
  47. 47. Best Practices to Contain Costs17 May 2013 Dentons Canada LLP Document reference # 47• At pleadings stage, focus on what information is needed to resolve thedispute• Some facts more difficult to prove than others: more expense while notcontributing much to resolution• Time-consuming issues should be considered in deciding whatclaims/defences to advance
  48. 48. Sampling17 May 2013 Dentons Canada LLP Document reference # 48• Keyword searches: run a test search• If lots of irrelevant or duplicate documents, revise search terms
  49. 49. Practice Pointers17 May 2013 Dentons Canada LLP Document reference # 49• Keyword searching can be used as a relevance screen• Keyword search methodologies must be:• Methodically designed• Tested• Refined• Hot issue: use of keywords for privilege review• Cooperation will reduce costs and disputes
  50. 50. Keywords17 May 2013 Dentons Canada LLP Document reference # 50• Dispute re construction of Bronx Hall of Justice: issue involvedproduction of non-party email of construction manager• Difficult to segregate relevant from irrelevant e-mail• One party proposed a handful of search terms• The other requested “thousands of additional search terms”
  51. 51. Difficulty of Keyword Searches17 May 2013 Dentons Canada LLP Document reference # 51• On construction projects, must ensure that keywords are neither over-nor under-inclusive• “Power” project or “nuclear” plant will be over-inclusive for a designengineer working on many projects in that area• The name of a specific project (ie “Project Bronx”) will be under-inclusiveas many responsive documents may not include project name• Can craft search terms to exclude non-responsive documents
  52. 52. 17 May 2013 Dentons Canada LLP Document reference # 52“This case is just the latest example of lawyers designing keywordsearches in the dark, by the seat of the pants, without adequate (indeed,here, apparently without any) discussion with those who wrote the emails.”William A. Gros Constr. Assocs. V. Am. Manufacturers Mutual Ins.
  53. 53. Keywords17 May 2013 Dentons Canada LLP Document reference # 53“This opinion should serve as a wake up call to the Bar in this District about theneed for careful thought, quality control, testing and cooperation with opposingcounsel in designing search terms or ‘keywords’ to be used to produce emails orother electronically stored information (ESI)”.William A. Gros Constr. Assocs. V. Am. Manufacturers Mutual Ins.
  54. 54. Other Keyword Decisions17 May 2013 Dentons Canada LLP Document reference # 54• SEC v. Collin & Aikman – Court rejected SEC’s blanket refusal to discusskeyword search
  55. 55. Costs of ESI Review17 May 2013 Dentons Canada LLP Document reference # 55• Adopt best practices around lawyer review (the largest chunk of cost indiscovery)• Lawyer review of ESI can represent up to 70% of litigation costs, withelectronic discovery search and retrieval exceeding $30,000 pergigabyte. (Accounting for the Costs of Electronic Discovery, by David Degnan, 12 Minnesota Journalof Law, Science, & Technology 1, Winter 2011, pg 151)
  56. 56. Cost Containment Policies17 May 2013 Dentons Canada LLP Document reference # 56• Use automated tools where appropriate• Where a substantial portion of discoverable documents are ESI• Early case assessment technology• Allows for front-end look at ESI• Can generate an analysis of information sources, overall volumes, costestimates
  57. 57. Cost Containment Policies17 May 2013 Dentons Canada LLP Document reference # 57• Linear review v. clustering technologies• Streamlines review process by grouping together documents relating toidentical or similar topics• Example: email trace – provides user with an instant view of an email threatcommunication to determine when and to whom emails were sent
  58. 58. Costs of ESI Review17 May 2013 Dentons Canada LLP Document reference # 58• Use of clustering review tools can reduce cost associated with lawyerreview time.• Linear review of 500,000 docs @ $65/hr (50 docs/hr) = $650,000• Conceptual review of 500,000 docs @ $65/hr (200 doc decisions/hr) =$162,500 (U.S. figures)• A combination of electronic tools and trained lawyers is most effectiveand efficient
  59. 59. The Discovery Plan17 May 2013 Dentons Canada LLP Document reference # 59• Think of the Discovery Plan as an Action Plan• Rule 29.1 gives Court power to refuse to grant any relief if parties failedto make or update a Discovery Plan• Discovery Plan should be in proportion to the size and nature of the case
  60. 60. The Discovery Plan00 Month 2013 Dentons Canada LLP Document reference # 60• Great Canadian Gaming Corporation v 1632842 Ontario Limited, 2011ONSC 6414 : Strong example of a Discovery Plan• The Plan covers the Scope of Production, the Data Set for Review, the ReviewProcess, the Production of Documents (including agreement about standardfield metadata and the coding conventions), Costs (and how tracked), amongother details• Model eDiscovery and eTrial precedents available online at Ontario BarAssoc. website and eDiscovery Portal
  61. 61. The Discovery Plan17 May 2013 Dentons Canada LLP Document reference # 61• Discovery plans can evolve as circumstances change• Kariouk v. Pombo, 2012 ONSC 939 : The plaintiff had proposed adiscovery plan, but the defendant had refused to formally sign offpending agreement on an electronic format for exchanging documents.The court points out that discovery plans can be modified as moreinformation is received• Canplas v. McKee, 2012 ONSC 1416:• Discovery Plan was established, however the agreement did not restrictdisclosure and production of information in any way• Defendant sought an order to protect the confidentiality and secrecy of certaininformation• The court notes that the timing coincides with when the confidentiality issuewas raised in the defendant’s litigation in Federal Court and is notunreasonable.
  62. 62. The Discovery Plan17 May 2013 Dentons Canada LLP Document reference # 62• Lecompte v. Doran, 2010 ONSC 6290:• Motion for further and better Affidavit dismissed• Parties had not reached any agreement as to form and terms ofproduction• In the absence of such agreement, not proper to attack Affidavit thatcomplies with the Rules
  63. 63. Form of Production17 May 2013 Dentons Canada LLP Document reference # 63• ESI is producible and compellable in discovery• Walter Construction v. Catalyst: Court ordered production of electronicdocuments even though plaintiff objected as documents had beenproduced in hard copy• Agree to format in Discovery Plan
  64. 64. Judicial Analysis of Defensibility17 May 2013 Dentons Canada LLP Document reference # 64• Did counsel follow a reasonable response process?• Did counsel act promptly?• Did counsel act comprehensively?• Did counsel consult with relevant stakeholders?• Did counsel involve technical experts?• Did counsel actively manage process?• Did counsel use the meet & confer process?
  65. 65. 17 May 2013 Dentons Canada LLP Document reference # 65
  66. 66. Questions?By: Karen GroulxD +1 416 863 4697karen.groulx@dentons.comDentons Canada LLP66
  67. 67. The preceding presentationcontains examples of thekinds of issues companiesdealing with ConstructionLitigation could face. If youare faced with one of theseissues, please retainprofessional assistance aseach situation is unique.67
  1. A particular slide catching your eye?

    Clipping is a handy way to collect important slides you want to go back to later.

×