How have courts treated privacy concerns for a plaintiff in her personal computer case?

On the issue of privacy, the plaintiff relies on the British Columbia case of Park v. Mullin, [2005] B.C.J. No. 2855. In that case the plaintiff claimed to have sustained a head injury and brain damage as a result of a motor vehicle accident. Prior to the accident, the plaintiff had been self-employed as a human resources consultant and she continued to work in that capacity since the accident. On the assumption that the plaintiff used her computer for both work and personal use, the defendant wanted access to all of the plaintiff’s computer documents because arguably they were relevant both to the loss of earning capacity claim and to the assessment of the plaintiff’s pre and post accident level of functioning. That court rejected the defendant’s request for inspection of the plaintiff’s computer because the order sought was too broad and in the nature of an authorization to search. The court took into consideration the plaintiff’s privacy concerns to both her private records and those of others who used the computer. The court found that the defendant offered no plausible evidence relating to how the types of documents requested would be used by the trier of fact, and that any evidence of the plaintiff’s level of cognitive functioning would be gained by an assessment of the plaintiff by experts in the field or by the examination at trial of witnesses, including the plaintiff. It was ultimately found that the types of documents requested had little if any probative value.