Source: 2019 BCHRT 197 (CanLII) | CanLII
Documents requested in a human rights matter must be arguably relevant.
 The test to be applied in an application under Rule 23(1) is whether a document may be relevant or arguably relevant, with the onus on the applicant to show some nexus between the document and a fact in issue: Brady v Interior Health Authority 2005 BCHRT 200 (CanLII) and Gichuru v The Law Society of British Columbia 2007 BCHRT 176 (CanLII). In Brady, the Tribunal stated at para. 53 that “the threshold is not a high one; there must be some nexus between the documents and a fact in issue. In order to decide whether the requested documents may be relevant, I must first look at the complaint and the response to the complaint to determine the facts in issue in the case.”