Author Topic: VAdm Norman - Supply Ship contract: Legal fight  (Read 273111 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Rifleman62

    Retired.

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 97,930
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,152
Re: VAdm Norman - Supply Ship contract: Legal fight
« Reply #775 on: February 13, 2019, 21:40:35 »
Quote
Quote from: Oldgateboatdriver on Today at 19:23:50
What this government wants or does not want is irrelevant.

Unless they actually are interfering politically (it is not beyond them, my personal opinion here), they were stupid enough to ask for RCMP investigations in a moment of anger and that's the end of it: After that, investigating, reviewing the evidence and deciding if an accusation is warranted, then proceeding with and setting its schedule is entirely in the hands of the police, prosecutor's office and ultimately the Court. The government has no say nor any further decision to make ... at least in a country under the rule of law.


NP comments today which appears to refute the above:

Quote
crumb13 Feb 2019 5:39 AM

There is, to my mind, an even bigger issue of abuse of process by government. I hearken back the government's attempt to put a gag order on their whole investigation of the embarrassment that the ham-handed attempt to finagle the contract for the supply ship to the Irvings caused. Having spent weeks investigating in secret, when VAdm Norman was publicly identified and put on ice without charges the RCMP applied for a press gag on reporting any detail of their investigation.

The judge who heard this application rejected it, ruling that the RCMP's affidavit failed to convince him that one was justified. He went on to opine that it also left him unconvinced that there was legal justification for their investigation having been pursued to the length it had been already. And he published that affidavit, albeit heavily redacted.

A read through the RCMP affidavit, as heavily redacted as it was, shows that at several points the RCMP, having reported to (redacted) that they could find no evidence that VAdm Norman had committed any offense, were then directed to double down on their efforts and use increasingly intrusive and questionable surveillance tools.

When, at the final juncture, they again reported that they could find no evidence of an offense, the investigation culminating in the dawn raid on the Norman family home. Why this was necessary and done is an open question, although one can see the chilling effect of this drama on anyone else who might irritate or cause embarrassment to the government.

We can understand why the judge was querulous; given the amount of time and effort that went into determining that there was no evidence that VAdm Norman had committed any offense, the logic that uses this lack of evidence to justify raiding his home and suspending him from his position is indefensible. But this was done, at someone's direction.

Whose; one wonders?
Never Congratulate Yourself In Victory, Nor Blame Your Horses In Defeat - Old Cossack Expression

Offline Loachman

  • Former Army Pilot in Drag
  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 218,402
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 7,480
Re: VAdm Norman - Supply Ship contract: Legal fight
« Reply #776 on: February 13, 2019, 22:05:37 »
Link?

Offline Cloud Cover

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 39,530
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 4,137
Re: VAdm Norman - Supply Ship contract: Legal fight
« Reply #777 on: February 13, 2019, 22:56:55 »
The person who wrote that is referring to the ITO a search warrant, and this decision of Judge Phillips to make the redacted ITO available: The Globe and Mail Inc. v. R., 2017 ONSC 2407
http://canlii.ca/t/h3h48

The decision contains, among other interesting statements, this gut wrenching observation about the case:

"[34]           It is part of Canada’s history for military procurement and political considerations to go hand in hand.  From Ross rifles to Sea King helicopters, supplies for the armed forces have often been buffeted by political winds.  The results are perhaps not always well received by those on the receiving end of the supply chain.  Here, it would appear that in late 2015, a long-awaited initiative to replace the Navy’s supply ship was maybe headed off the rails due to political considerations, a possibility that allegedly upset a man most eagerly awaiting completion of the contract.  In my view, that mindset and alleged communication arising from it is hardly the stuff of stigma or moral turpitude.  At its highest, it appears that the potential allegation against Vice-Admiral Norman is that he was trying to keep a contractual relationship together so that the country might get itself a badly needed supply ship.  A reasonable member of the informed public might understand the frustration of being Vice-Admiral of a Navy that cannot on its own go more than a tank of gas away from port.  Nowhere is there any suggestion that the man was even thinking of trying to line his own pockets, or get any personal advantage whatsoever.  An officer of his rank would be expected to develop and maintain relationships with those in the business of supplying the Navy and his communications with such people are not, therefore, in and of themselves untoward."
...
Living the lean life

Offline Loachman

  • Former Army Pilot in Drag
  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 218,402
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 7,480
Re: VAdm Norman - Supply Ship contract: Legal fight
« Reply #778 on: February 16, 2019, 12:19:26 »
PCO lawyer asked prosecutor if there was a way to 'engineer issues' in Norman case, court hears

Judge hearing breach of trust case reads out redacted comments from prosecution notes during pre-trial hearing

Murray Brewster CBC News Posted: Feb 15, 2019 1:04 PM ET

The top lawyer at the Privy Council Office apparently asked federal prosecutors if it was possible to "engineer the issues at stake" in the criminal case against Vice-Admiral Mark Norman.

The remarks - made on Sept. 14, 2018 and attributed to PCO lawyer Paul Shuttle - were contained in prosecution notes entered into evidence at a pretrial hearing involving the former vice-chief of the defence staff, who faces one count of breach of trust.

Justice Heather Perkins-McVey made reference to them on Friday as the Crown attempted to explain why it redacted notes being sought by Norman's defence team.

The judge acknowledged there is a lot background missing from the reference.

"You wonder what that is about," said Perkins-McVey. "We don't know the context, what they were speaking about."

Defence attorney Christine Mainville agreed and suggested she wasn't prepared to jump to conclusions either, saying a lot of references in both the censored and uncensored versions of the notes "remain ambiguous."

But she also noted during Friday's pretrial hearing that notes of meetings between the Crown and officials at the Privy Council Office, which supports the Prime Minister's Office and cabinet, will be important to the defence when it moves at the end of March to have the charges against Norman dismissed.

<snip>

"There no direction from the Privy Council Office to PPSC on how to direct the case," he said. "There was no direction or input from the Prime Minister's Office to our office on how to direct the case."

As he spoke, Justice Perkins-McVey flipped through the censored version of the meeting notes and asked, "What about comments from Paul Shuttle, like, 'Is there a way to engineer the issues at stake?'"

The Crown did file an uncensored version with the courts on Friday.

MacFarlane insisted the meetings were meant to identify a potential witness who could speak to the issue of cabinet confidences. Norman is accused of leaking cabinet secrets related to a $668 million shipbuilding deal to lease a supply ship for the navy in 2015.

The judge seemed skeptical of that explanation.

"There was certainly a discussion of evidence," said Perkins-McVey, referring to the notes but not quoting further from them. "There was discussion of the evidence-gathering process. Obviously this was done well before."

The Liberals are not doing well in the comment section - and this is a CBC article.

Offline Halifax Tar

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 48,083
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,918
  • Ready Aye Ready
Re: VAdm Norman - Supply Ship contract: Legal fight
« Reply #779 on: February 22, 2019, 14:48:17 »
Mark Norman's defence team hits Trudeau, Butts with subpoenas

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/mark-norman-trudeau-wernick-butts-1.5029737

Subpoenas have been issued to Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and his former and current top officials — including ex-principal secretary Gerald Butts — for any notes, emails or texts they may have related to the criminal case against Vice-Admiral Mark Norman.

The notes are being sought by the legal team defending the former vice chief of the defence staff against a single charge of breach of trust. Norman is accused of leaking cabinet secrets in relation to a shipbuilding deal.

The subpoenas were issued earlier this month as Toronto lawyer Marie Henein was preparing a motion to dismiss the case on the basis of alleged political interference.

The court order for notes includes both the prime minister and Butts, and also Trudeau's Chief of Staff Katie Telford, Clerk of the Privy Council Michael Wernick and Zita Astravas, chief of staff to Defence Minister Harjit Sajjan.

More on link above.
Lead me, follow me or get the hell out of my way

Offline Cloud Cover

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 39,530
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 4,137
Re: VAdm Norman - Supply Ship contract: Legal fight
« Reply #780 on: February 22, 2019, 15:19:43 »
PCO lawyer asked prosecutor if there was a way to 'engineer issues' in Norman case, court hears

Judge hearing breach of trust case reads out redacted comments from prosecution notes during pre-trial hearing

Murray Brewster CBC News Posted: Feb 15, 2019 1:04 PM ET

The top lawyer at the Privy Council Office apparently asked federal prosecutors if it was possible to "engineer the issues at stake" in the criminal case against Vice-Admiral Mark Norman.


And here is another example of Privy Council Clerk Michael Wernick at work again. Is engineering a weak and spurious criminal prosecution and with this revelation now possibly a malicious legal prosecution part of the PCO duty to support and promote the government agenda?? 
Living the lean life

Offline Rifleman62

    Retired.

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 97,930
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,152
Re: VAdm Norman - Supply Ship contract: Legal fight
« Reply #781 on: February 22, 2019, 16:42:29 »
There are no notes. Remember?
Never Congratulate Yourself In Victory, Nor Blame Your Horses In Defeat - Old Cossack Expression

Offline Eagle Eye View

  • Full Member
  • *****
  • 17,525
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 365
Re: VAdm Norman - Supply Ship contract: Legal fight
« Reply #782 on: March 03, 2019, 11:12:53 »
I hope he wins and sue the government for every penny!
Leadership and learning are indispensable to each other.

John F. Kennedy

Offline Fishbone Jones

    MSC -6495.

  • "Some people will only like you if you fit inside their box. Don't be afraid to shove that box up their ass."
  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Myth
  • *
  • 280,437
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 18,653
    • Army.ca
Re: VAdm Norman - Supply Ship contract: Legal fight
« Reply #783 on: March 03, 2019, 14:44:16 »
I hope he wins and sue the government for every penny!

That may be all that's left in the treasury after the grits give it all away to unsupervised humanitarian projects with no accounting or due diligence.
Corruption in politics doesn't scare me.
What scares me is how comfortable people are doing nothing about it.

Offline FSTO

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 49,850
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,807
Re: VAdm Norman - Supply Ship contract: Legal fight
« Reply #784 on: March 06, 2019, 20:25:34 »
As part of the PM 1 course our group was briefed on the workings of Treasury Board (TB) and the Treasury Board Secretariat (TBS) in regards to getting contracts passed by them. Our briefer was a young lass from TBS who led us through the hoops we have to jump through to get projects approved by TB. When the project gets presented to TB, the board can accept it, accept it with reservations, reject it (very rarely happens) or send it back for further work (not often because that shows that the Project Manager and the TBS did not do their jobs). Anyway at the Q&A I asked if TB has ever gone back to relook at a project that has already been passed by a previous board or a previous government TB. I specifically referenced the iAOR. She said that AFASK a TB President has never asked to review a previously passed project.

Interesting......or am I just a bit tin foily?
 

Offline Navy_Pete

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • 30,595
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 859
Re: VAdm Norman - Supply Ship contract: Legal fight
« Reply #785 on: March 06, 2019, 21:02:03 »
As part of the PM 1 course our group was briefed on the workings of Treasury Board (TB) and the Treasury Board Secretariat (TBS) in regards to getting contracts passed by them. Our briefer was a young lass from TBS who led us through the hoops we have to jump through to get projects approved by TB. When the project gets presented to TB, the board can accept it, accept it with reservations, reject it (very rarely happens) or send it back for further work (not often because that shows that the Project Manager and the TBS did not do their jobs). Anyway at the Q&A I asked if TB has ever gone back to relook at a project that has already been passed by a previous board or a previous government TB. I specifically referenced the iAOR. She said that AFASK a TB President has never asked to review a previously passed project.

Interesting......or am I just a bit tin foily?
 

It's too bad you had a young analyst; when I did that course about six years ago we had a grey hair mandarin that was semi retired teaching it and knew everything about the paper and actual process. Some of them are okay, but others have a lot more confidence than experience, so would take a lot of grains of salt with whatever she said.

She wouldn't be wrong though; the review was being done about the contract award and not the budget or project itself.  For big enough dollar values a notification goes back to TB with the actual dollar value of the contract being awarded based on the bid price (vice the estimate from the project for that specific item).  That's a different approval gate, and sometimes is a condition of the project budget approval (to come back for a last check before signing the contract). That one can be a pain as the bids normally have a time limit, and if you hit some kind of review snag (ie the Minister leaves, or it's an election), and feels amateurish to go back to the company to confirm you can get an extension on the bid price (for another 30 days or whatever).

Still can't get a straight answer, but I believe the Harper govt actually approved the iAOR contract award (as a sole source) under a cabinet exception before they transferred, but not sure if it was actually signed.  If they had canceled it, guessing we would have paid out a bunch of money to get no capability, and think it was in one of the stories for the VAdm trials where the notes from a civil servant showed the only discussion points where actually around the talking points and media lines for the project, so they were basically stalling to repackage it as their own idea.

Online Chris Pook

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 207,355
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 12,726
  • Wha daur say Mass in ma lug!
Re: VAdm Norman - Supply Ship contract: Legal fight
« Reply #786 on: March 07, 2019, 02:09:22 »
Interesting line from today's testimony

Quote
Tonda MacCharles

Verified account
 
@TondaMacC
 10h10 hours ago
More
Raitt asks if Drouin thinks its appropriate for the staff of PMO to have convos with "your prosecutors" or DPP.
Drouin says I don't think so, but suggests it's doubtful they did.
"Wyrd bið ful aræd"

Online Chris Pook

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 207,355
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 12,726
  • Wha daur say Mass in ma lug!
Re: VAdm Norman - Supply Ship contract: Legal fight
« Reply #787 on: March 07, 2019, 02:12:29 »
https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/mark-norman-davie-shipyard-breach-trust-1.5014538

Norman's defence accuses Trudeau PMO of attempting to direct prosecution
- 11 Feb 19
    'The prosecution should not be discussing trial strategy with the (PMO's) right hand person' - Mainville

The essence of the article above is the the Judge's remark:


Quote
"The prosecution should not be discussing trial strategy with the Prime Minister's Office's right-hand person," she said, referring to the PCO legal counsel. "By all appearances, this is a more direct influencing of the prosecution. The attorney general is entirely bypassed. The Prime Minister's Office, via its right arm the PCO, is dealing directly with the (Public Prosecution Service of Canada). And the prosecution service is allowing this to happen."

That prompted a cutting remark from the judge hearing Norman's case.

"So much for the independence of the PPSC," said Judge Heather Perkins-McVey.

Then there is the Minister of Justice/PMO/SNC mess.



Possibly it's me, but compare the CBC story at link above to the National Post's article. Seems the CBC article left some of the  (damning) back and forth out.

https://nationalpost.com/news/politics/alleged-political-interference-in-mark-norman-case-more-concerning-than-snc-lavalin-accusations-defence-lawyer?video_autoplay=true

Alleged political interference in Mark Norman case ‘more concerning’ than SNC-Lavalin accusations: defence
- 11 Feb 19
    Lawyer Christine Mainville told the court that prosecutors should not be talking strategy with the Privy Council Office, which she
    called the ‘right arm’ to the PMO


See previous comment by DM Justice Drouin in JWR testimony.
"Wyrd bið ful aræd"

Online milnews.ca

  • Info Curator, Baker & Food Slut
  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Relic
  • *
  • 420,065
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 22,077
    • MILNEWS.ca-Military News for Canadians
Re: VAdm Norman - Supply Ship contract: Legal fight
« Reply #788 on: March 07, 2019, 06:49:03 »
PCO lawyer asked prosecutor if there was a way to 'engineer issues' in Norman case, court hears ...
Yet another way of saying "we never asked for anything against the law, just a solution," or, put another way ...
“The risk of insult is the price of clarity.” -- Roy H. Williams

The words I share here are my own, not those of anyone else or anybody I may be affiliated with.

Tony Prudori
MILNEWS.ca - Twitter

Offline Rifleman62

    Retired.

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 97,930
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,152
Re: VAdm Norman - Supply Ship contract: Legal fight
« Reply #789 on: March 10, 2019, 09:58:48 »
https://globalnews.ca/national/program/the-roy-green-show

The Roy Green show on radio today is to have a discussion re this case. Guest is a CF member (retired???).
Never Congratulate Yourself In Victory, Nor Blame Your Horses In Defeat - Old Cossack Expression

Offline Rifleman62

    Retired.

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 97,930
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,152
Re: VAdm Norman - Supply Ship contract: Legal fight
« Reply #790 on: March 15, 2019, 10:28:55 »
Believe this fits here due to what the former VCDS has been charged with. Mods can move it as appropriate. This was not written by a certain reporter, it is a publicly available Charles Adler podcast. Starts at the 1:10 mark.

Chris Adler podcast

"90 Minutes"!!

Read the NP.

Mod edit: name removal
« Last Edit: March 18, 2019, 11:02:34 by Scott »
Never Congratulate Yourself In Victory, Nor Blame Your Horses In Defeat - Old Cossack Expression

Online ModlrMike

    : Riding time again... woohooo!

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 216,429
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,836
    • Canadian Association of Physician Assistants
Re: VAdm Norman - Supply Ship contract: Legal fight
« Reply #791 on: March 15, 2019, 12:21:43 »
Now we know the lifespan of confidential information in Ottawa.
WARNING: The consumption of alcohol may create the illusion that you are tougher,smarter, faster and better looking than most people.
Every normal man must be tempted, at times, to spit upon his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats. (H.L. Mencken 1919)
Zero tolerance is the politics of the lazy. All it requires is that you do nothing and ban everything.

Offline Fishbone Jones

    MSC -6495.

  • "Some people will only like you if you fit inside their box. Don't be afraid to shove that box up their ass."
  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Myth
  • *
  • 280,437
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 18,653
    • Army.ca
Re: VAdm Norman - Supply Ship contract: Legal fight
« Reply #792 on: March 15, 2019, 12:23:54 »
The walls are coming down around the PMO's ears and they are oblivious. Business as usual, nothing to see here, move along.

The ultimate height of government arrogance and attitude.
Corruption in politics doesn't scare me.
What scares me is how comfortable people are doing nothing about it.

Online Blackadder1916

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 182,090
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,971
Re: VAdm Norman - Supply Ship contract: Legal fight
« Reply #793 on: March 15, 2019, 13:13:19 »
Believe this fits here due to what the former VCDS has been charged with. Mods can move it as appropriate. This was not written by a certain reporter, it is a publicly available Charles Adler podcast. Starts at the 1:10 mark.

Now we know the lifespan of confidential information in Ottawa.

As much as I would like to comment about the substance of the issue raised in Rifleman62's post, a review of the guideline thread concerning this journalist seems pretty clear that there should be no discussion about or reference to him regardless of the source material.
Quote
. . . no reference be made of any sort to him or his work, from here forward.

I would suggest that the Mods delete these few messages as they add nothing substantive to the topic discussion.  Of course we can still complain about Irving and the government in general.

Mod edit: name removal.
« Last Edit: March 18, 2019, 11:03:37 by Scott »
Whisky for the gentlemen that like it. And for the gentlemen that don't like it - Whisky.

Offline Scott

    - apparently an antagonist.

  • Likes fire and loud noises.
  • Chief of Staff
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 201,060
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 7,986
  • El Scorcho Diablo
Re: VAdm Norman - Supply Ship contract: Legal fight
« Reply #794 on: March 18, 2019, 11:00:21 »
Thanks for the various reports on this subject. It's been reviewed and hashed over with Mike.

We're relaxing the standard in this one case as it does not refer to specific work of an individual, or draw from files from same.

Names will be edited out as they are not to be hosted on this site, per the guideline.

Thanks all.

Scott
Be nice for no reason.

Online milnews.ca

  • Info Curator, Baker & Food Slut
  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Relic
  • *
  • 420,065
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 22,077
    • MILNEWS.ca-Military News for Canadians
Re: VAdm Norman - Supply Ship contract: Legal fight
« Reply #795 on: March 19, 2019, 13:18:59 »
A bit more ...
Quote
A federal procurement official charged with breach of trust was told by the RCMP roughly two years ago that he also was in a suspect in the same investigation into the alleged leaking of cabinet secrets which had ensnared Vice-Admiral Mark Norman.

The lawyer for Matthew Matchett revealed that fact in court Tuesday as a date for a preliminary hearing was set in Ontario Superior Court.

Matthew Day tore a strip off the Crown saying his client has yet to see all of the evidence gathered against him despite the time it has taken to investigate. 

"We've been waiting for two years for the other shoe to drop," Day told the court.

"Disclosure seems to have been ready in August 2018. We received it in February approaching the two-year anniversary of when our client was informed he was a suspect in this matter."

The detail is significant because lawyers for Norman, the former vice-chief of the defence staff, and the Conservative opposition have publicly questioned why it took so long to charge Matchett and have sought records related to the handling his case.

Prosecutors have disclosed — in Day's words — a "voluminous" number of documents, but "we don't have it all yet."

The preliminary inquiry will run over three days, starting Oct. 23 ...
More @ link
“The risk of insult is the price of clarity.” -- Roy H. Williams

The words I share here are my own, not those of anyone else or anybody I may be affiliated with.

Tony Prudori
MILNEWS.ca - Twitter

Online milnews.ca

  • Info Curator, Baker & Food Slut
  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Relic
  • *
  • 420,065
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 22,077
    • MILNEWS.ca-Military News for Canadians
Re: VAdm Norman - Supply Ship contract: Legal fight
« Reply #796 on: March 28, 2019, 19:29:37 »
Remember this the next time someone says, "you have to keep your briefing note to 2/3/4 pages" ...
Quote
Vice-Admiral Mark Norman’s lawyer says she wants to see a secret 60-page memo the federal government’s top bureaucrat penned to Prime Minister Justin Trudeau about her client’s case.

Lawyer Marie Henein revealed the existence of Privy Council clerk Michael Wernick’s memo to Trudeau on Thursday as Norman’s breach-of-trust case returned for another day of pre-trial hearings.

The revelation is the latest twist in Henein’s months-long fight for thousands of government documents she says are essential to prove his innocence.

Subpoenas were issued last month for emails, BlackBerry messages and other internal communications from Trudeau, Wernick and other top officials about Norman as Henein seeks records to prove political interference in the case.

Henein told the court that she recently received a copy of Wernick’s memo to the prime minister dated Oct. 24, 2018 as part of a larger trove of documents but she said the contents were completely blacked out.

“We received in the material that’s come to us — in completely redacted form for solicitor-client privilege — a memo from Michael Wernick to the prime minister,” Henein told Justice Heather Perkins-McVey.

“Mr. Wernick is not a lawyer, I don’t believe,” Perkins-McVey replied, though she quickly added: “I’m not sure.”

It was at that point that Henein said she planned to present arguments on why the contents of that memo and others obtained from the government should be released ...
More @ link
“The risk of insult is the price of clarity.” -- Roy H. Williams

The words I share here are my own, not those of anyone else or anybody I may be affiliated with.

Tony Prudori
MILNEWS.ca - Twitter

Offline Cloud Cover

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 39,530
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 4,137
Re: VAdm Norman - Supply Ship contract: Legal fight
« Reply #797 on: March 28, 2019, 21:58:15 »
Common  interest privilege, otherwise known as litigation privilege, attaches  to communications or documents prepared during or in anticipation of litigation, and for the dominant purpose of preparing for such actual or anticipated litigation. This document likely falls into that category.

As I understand it, the document was not just sent to the PMO but the PMO lawyers.
Living the lean life

Offline YZT580

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • 25,410
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 757
Re: VAdm Norman - Supply Ship contract: Legal fight
« Reply #798 on: March 28, 2019, 22:19:30 »
I can understand that correspondence from a lawyer to his client or to potential witnesses would be privileged but a memo from a civil servant to the PM even if carbon copied to a lawyer should not be entitled to the same courtesy.  They aren't lawyers themselves. 

Offline Cloud Cover

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 39,530
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 4,137
Re: VAdm Norman - Supply Ship contract: Legal fight
« Reply #799 on: March 28, 2019, 22:56:59 »
Lawyers can only be expected to be experts in the law.
The giving and receiving of legal advice is solicitor and client privileged. There is obviously much more than that to most litigation.

So, for example, in the course of preparing for litigation about a structural defect with a bridge, a lawyer probably needs some understanding about an engineering issue, they will request a report to be prepared to give an opinion or explanation that may be used in creating and developing a theory of litigation. Like a game plan. Obviously, a clients game plan developed by a lawyer with other parties is going to be subject to some form of litigation protection. It may sound devious and devilish, but that's the way it works in common law litigation.

The main difference between solicitor client privilege and litigation privilege is that solicitor client privilege last forever unless waived by the client voluntarily. Litigation privilege ends with the final decision of a case (with a few odd exceptions such as Cabinet Confidence!!!)
Living the lean life