Sedona Canada Principles 3rd edition: what changed for forensic teams

A practitioner's summary of the changes in the Sedona Canada Principles 3rd edition, with implications for forensic teams and Canadian e-discovery counsel.

Published May 1, 2026Updated Apr 1, 20269 min read

The Sedona Canada Principles 3rd edition, published in 2022, updates the framework for cloud-native ESI, technology-assisted review, and modern data preservation challenges. The 12 Principles remain stable in number and structure, but the commentaries have been expanded significantly to reflect a decade of changes in how Canadian organizations create and store electronic information. For forensic teams, the most important practical changes are around cloud preservation, proportionality in cloud-only environments, and the treatment of TAR as a defensible review methodology.

This summary walks through the key changes, the practical implications for forensic preservation and collection, and what counsel should reference in production protocols going forward.

What the Sedona Canada Principles are
The 12 Principles at a glance
What changed in the 3rd edition
Implications for forensic teams
Implications for production protocols
FAQ

1. What the Sedona Canada Principles are

The Sedona Canada Principles are the leading Canadian guide to e-discovery practice. They are published by the Sedona Conference Canada Working Group, an industry consortium of judges, practitioners, and academics. The Principles do not have the force of law but are widely cited by Canadian courts as authoritative guidance.

The first edition was published in 2008. The second edition followed in 2015. The third edition was published in 2022 to reflect cloud-native ESI, the maturation of TAR, and the evolution of Canadian privacy law.

2. The 12 Principles at a glance

The 12 Principles, summarized:

ESI is discoverable. Electronic information is subject to the same discovery obligations as paper.
Proportionality. The burden and expense of e-discovery should be proportionate to the importance of the matter.
Cooperation. Parties should cooperate to identify and resolve e-discovery issues efficiently.
Preservation. Reasonable preservation begins when litigation is reasonably anticipated.
Native or near-native production. ESI should generally be produced in its native form, with metadata preserved.
Inadvertent disclosure. Parties should agree on procedures for handling inadvertently produced privileged material.
Limits on collection. Discovery should not require the parties to collect or produce all conceivably relevant ESI.
Information governance. Organizations should implement reasonable information governance.
Inaccessible data. Reasonably inaccessible data may be excluded from production absent good cause.
Cost-shifting. Costs of producing reasonably inaccessible ESI may be shifted in appropriate cases.
Sanctions. Sanctions for spoliation should reflect the conduct of the offending party.
Technology-assisted review. TAR is a defensible methodology when properly applied.

3. What changed in the 3rd edition

The 12 Principles remain the same in number and core wording. The commentaries have been substantially updated.

Cloud-native ESI receives much more attention. The 2nd edition treated cloud as a category of inaccessible data; the 3rd edition treats it as a primary source of ESI in most modern matters, with specific guidance on Microsoft 365, Google Workspace, Slack, Teams, and Salesforce.

Technology-assisted review (TAR) is now treated as fully defensible, not as an emerging or experimental methodology. The commentary discusses TAR 1.0 (active learning) and TAR 2.0 (continuous active learning), with guidance on protocol drafting and quality control.

Cross-border data flow receives expanded treatment, particularly for Canadian organizations subject to PIPEDA and BC PIPA dealing with US-based cloud providers and US-based reviewers.

Privacy law integration is expanded to reflect Quebec Law 25, the modernization of PIPEDA, and the evolving role of provincial privacy regulators.

Preservation in collaboration tools (Slack, Teams, Discord) receives specific guidance because these are now central to many matters.

4. Implications for forensic teams

For forensic teams, four practical implications:

Cloud preservation is the default. A modern e-discovery matter starts with cloud preservation, not endpoint preservation. The 3rd edition assumes this and counsel should structure scoping accordingly.

Audit-log retention is a critical scoping question. Because so much evidence lives in cloud audit logs with short retention windows, scoping must address retention as a first-order question. Preservation cannot wait for the formal hold notice.

Defensible TAR is now expected. Where matters justify TAR, the methodology, control set, sampling protocol, and quality-control evidence should all be documented. The commentary supports this.

Cross-border review must be structured for Canadian privacy compliance. Where review takes place outside Canada, the engagement must address the data-export implications.

For counsel, the practical effect is that scoping conversations should reference the 3rd edition commentaries directly. Production protocols should cite the relevant Principles for each substantive choice.

5. Implications for production protocols

Production protocols drafted under the 3rd edition framework should explicitly address:

Preservation of cloud audit logs and the retention windows applicable to each platform.
TAR methodology if used, with the protocol attached as an exhibit.
Native versus near-native production for each major data type.
Privilege handling including clawback agreements.
Cross-border data flow if review or production crosses jurisdictions.
Cost allocation for inaccessible data sources.

Reference: The Sedona Conference Canada Working Group publications page. Sedona Canada Principles 3rd edition (2022).

6. FAQ

Q: Are the Sedona Canada Principles binding on Canadian courts? A: No. They are persuasive guidance, not binding law. Canadian courts have cited them frequently as authoritative.

Q: Does the 3rd edition supersede the 2nd? A: Yes. Practitioners should reference the 3rd edition as the current authority.

Q: How does the 3rd edition treat technology-assisted review? A: As a defensible methodology when properly applied. The 3rd edition is more confident on TAR than the 2nd was.

Q: What if production protocols still reference the 2nd edition? A: Update them. The 3rd edition's expanded commentaries (especially on cloud and TAR) are now the appropriate reference.

Q: How does the 3rd edition interact with Quebec Law 25? A: The commentaries address Law 25 specifically. For matters involving Quebec data, the Sedona framework should be applied with Law 25 considerations integrated.

CTA strip

Headline: Have an e-discovery matter that needs Sedona-aligned scoping? Primary CTA: Book a confidential consultation Secondary text: Or call (604) 800-9060

Frequently asked

Are the Sedona Canada Principles binding on Canadian courts?

No. They are persuasive guidance, not binding law. Canadian courts have cited them frequently as authoritative.

Does the 3rd edition supersede the 2nd?

Yes. Practitioners should reference the 3rd edition as the current authority.

How does the 3rd edition treat technology-assisted review?

As a defensible methodology when properly applied. The 3rd edition is more confident on TAR than the 2nd was.

What if production protocols still reference the 2nd edition?

Update them. The 3rd edition's expanded commentaries (especially on cloud and TAR) are now the appropriate reference.

How does the 3rd edition interact with Quebec Law 25?

The commentaries address Law 25 specifically. For matters involving Quebec data, the Sedona framework should be applied with Law 25 considerations integrated.