Executive Summary: Key Legal and Evidentiary Issues

• Defendants sought an interlocutory injunction to recover and control documents allegedly containing confidential and privileged information.

• The Plaintiff’s transfer of documents to her personal email account raised concerns over solicitor-client privilege and breach of confidentiality obligations.

• The Court addressed the Defendants’ right to question the Plaintiff under Rule 6.8 regarding possession and distribution of documents.

• Restrictions were placed on questioning to protect the integrity of Auditor General and RCMP investigations.

• Injunction applications were adjourned pending completion of the Rule 6.8 questioning.

• A future case conference was scheduled to address privilege issues, litigation plans, and possible case management.

Facts of the case

Athana Mentzelopoulos, the former CEO and President of Alberta Health Services (AHS), filed a wrongful dismissal lawsuit against AHS and the Province of Alberta. She alleges that her termination was unlawful. In the days leading up to her dismissal, it was discovered that Ms. Mentzelopoulos had emailed nine documents from her AHS email account to her personal account. The Defendants allege these documents contained confidential business records and, in some cases, solicitor-client privileged information, which she had no right to retain or use.

The Defendants filed an emergency application seeking an interlocutory injunction requiring the Plaintiff to return and delete the documents, to provide an affidavit listing what she had taken and to whom she disclosed it, and to prohibit her from using or distributing the documents. In the background, the Auditor General of Alberta and the RCMP were conducting investigations, adding complexity to the situation, especially regarding disclosure and confidentiality obligations.

Outcome of the decision

Justice D.A. Yungwirth allowed the Defendants' request to proceed with questioning the Plaintiff under Rule 6.8 of the Alberta Rules of Court. This questioning was limited to identifying which documents Ms. Mentzelopoulos took and to whom she disclosed them, explicitly excluding any questions about what was provided to the Auditor General or the RCMP to protect ongoing investigations. The applications for injunctive relief were adjourned until after the Rule 6.8 questioning concluded.

The March 28, 2025 Consent Order that restricted the Plaintiff's use and distribution of the emails remained in force, with an exception allowing disclosures to the Auditor General and the RCMP. The Court also directed that after the questioning, a case conference would be held to determine the next steps, including addressing solicitor-client privilege claims, planning the litigation, and deciding whether the case should be formally case-managed.

No final judgment was rendered on the wrongful dismissal claim itself, meaning the case remains ongoing with critical procedural steps still to be completed.