Skip to content

All About Information

A legal blog about the law of information by Dan Michaluk of Borden Ladner Gervais LLP

Tag: metadata

Case Report – Production of hard drive ordered

On September 11th, the Ontario Superior Court of Justice ordered the production of a forensic image of a hard drive. Although not clear on the face of the endorsement, this appears to be an order for the production of a departed employee’s former work hard drive.

The Court saw the production order as an efficient means of producing accessible metadata and noted there was no evidence that the production order would lead to the disclosure of confidential or privileged information:

The cost of redacting the non-relevant documents and associated metadata is expensive and time consuming and it is efficient and cost effective to simply reproduce the entire hard drive in its original form. Rule 1.04(1) of the Rules requires the court to liberally construe the Rules to secure the just, most expeditious and least expensive determination of the proceeding on its merits. There is no evidence to suggest that the non-relevant documents are sensitive, confidential or prejudicial in any way such that Hummingbird might be entitled to some form of protection or to warrant the ordering of the redaction, which is a costly exercise.

The Court also presumed (based on the plaintiff’s prior production of paper records from the hard drive) that production of the hard drive itself would produce additional relevant metadata:

While there was no evidence as to the precise nature of metadata, it seems to me that metadata is “data and information in electronic form”. Hummingbird has determined that certain of the documents located on the hard drive and certain of the metadata was relevant. In my view, once Hummingbird has determined that a particular document is relevant, the metadata in relation to such document should be produced. In my view, the metadata is akin to a “time/;date stamp” affixed to a letter or the “fax header” that indicated the time/date of faxing and receipt.

As the Court noted, it made its order without the benefit of affidavit evidence from either party and without the benefit of hearing submissions on any case law on the proper scope of production of records in electronic form.

Hummingbird v. Mustafa, 2007 CanLII 39610(Ont. S.C.J.).

Dan Michaluk Uncategorized Leave a comment September 28, 2007September 28, 2007 1 Minute

2012 Canadian Law Blog Awards Winner

2009 Canadian Law Blog Awards Winner

Recent Posts

  • Court of Appeal affirms robust interpretation of academic freedom exclusion in Alberta
  • Notes on Nova Scotia’s FOIPOP Reform Bill
  • File path information, network security and FOI
  • Ont CA finds compliance with a reasonable record retention policy weighs against unacceptable negligence finding
  • System monitoring decision stresses employees’ informed choice
  • IPC decision highlights issues about threat assessment and PHIPA application
  • Critical Cyber Systems Protection Act is back – seven points for designated operators
  • Sask CA says how to interpret access rights, and addresses various standards for proof of harm
  • In praise of cyber response transparency (and in defence of the “breach coach”)
  • Alberta Court says Charter precludes statutory compulsion to identify scrap metal sellers

Categories

    Blogs I follow

    • Tim Banks
    • David Fraser
    • Bradley Freedman
    • Eloise Gratton

    Disclaimer

    Posts. The views expressed here are solely the authors’ and should not be attributed to Borden Ladner Gervais LLP or its clients. The material and information provided on this website are for general information only and should not, in any respect, be relied on as legal advice or opinion. The authors make no claims, promises or guarantees about the accuracy, completeness, or adequacy of any information linked or referred to or contained herein. No person should act or refrain from acting in reliance on any information found on this website or blog, without first retaining counsel and obtaining appropriate professional advice from a lawyer duly licensed to practice law in the relevant jurisdiction. These materials do not constitute legal advice and do not create a lawyer-client relationship between you and any of the authors or BLG. The authors act only on behalf of management. They welcome management-side inquires, but interested persons should not send any information about their matters to the authors in initial communications and before they have had a chance to complete a conflict check.

    Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com.
    Privacy & Cookies: This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this website, you agree to their use.
    To find out more, including how to control cookies, see here: Cookie Policy
    • Subscribe Subscribed
      • All About Information
      • Join 158 other subscribers
      • Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
      • All About Information
      • Subscribe Subscribed
      • Sign up
      • Log in
      • Report this content
      • View site in Reader
      • Manage subscriptions
      • Collapse this bar