New Law: All surveillance must be disclosed, or else

The Ontario Reports legal journal published the evidentiary mid-trial decision of McKelvey J. in a case Tim and Darcy took to trial in November. The decision imposes new restrictions on defendants who only disclose some, but not all, surveillance in its possession.

The defendant in a personal injury action had provided details at his examination for discovery of surveillance of the plaintiff. The defendant later properly served surveillance that was conducted in October 2012. Additional surveillance was carried out in October 2013 and in June, July and September 2014, but details of the surveillance and the videos themselves were not produced to the plaintiff until November 2014 just before the trial.

The court ruled that:
1) The defendant would have to pay the costs of an adjournment if the plaintiff requested one to respond to the surveillance.
2) If the trial proceeded, the defendant could only use the original surveillance it obtained in 2012.
3) The plaintiff was permitted to make use of any surveillance evidence as it deems appropriate. The case is cited as Wigmore v Myler 2014 ONSC 6744.