Is there any case law where privileged documents have been inadvertently included in a volume of productions?

In 2006, Belobaba J. in Chan v. Dynasty Executive Suite Ltd., 2006 CarswellOnt 41318, considered a circumstance in which a document over which privilege had been claimed in an unsworn affidavit of documents was inadvertently produced in a volume of productions. The receiving counsel was advised of the inadvertent inclusion of the document and was asked to return it. Counsel refused to return it which resulted in the motion before Belobaba J. In attempting to justify the refusal, counsel argued that it was a relevant document and thus disputed the claim of privilege. At paragraphs 23 and 30 of that decision, Belobaba J. said that privilege is not lost simply because the documents are relevant to the action and that determining privilege by reference to relevance would defeat a principle that is an underpinning of our legal system. Just because privileged documents prove to be useful to the receiving counsel does not mean that the privilege had been lost. Belobaba J. went on to say at paragraph 30 that “the mere loss of physical possession of a privileged solicitor-client communication due to an inadvertent or negligent disclosure does not automatically waive or terminate the privilege. RULE 62.02(4)(a)