Foreign state requested documents seized under a warrant in Canada to be sent to it to aid in criminal investigation. Governing statute was Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters Act. Attorney General of Canada sought order under s. 15 of Act to send items in question. Voir dire was held to address respondents’ challenge to sufficiency of evidence in support of warrant.

Application Dismissed. Search Warrant set aside. Request was worded less forcefully than officer’s affidavit. There was no evidence in request that public prosecutor held strong beliefs of fraud that were attributed to him by officer. Request read more as though public prosecutor was investigating number of possible theories and wanted to know more about certain transactions. Request contained important information that was omitted from officer’s affidavit. Officer’s affidavit took on more of advocacy role in identifying evidence that would support the conclusion that a crime had taken place. Misstatements and omissions in affidavit created a seriously misleading picture for the judge who authorized the warrant.