Where things stand in the battle over records in the lawsuit of former Alberta Health Services exec

To the average Albertan, the headlines tied to developments in the lawsuit launched by the former CEO of Alberta Health Services can be confusing — records being produced in one instance and held back in another, for example.

Then there’s the length of time involved. Twenty-one months have passed since Athana Mentzelopoulos filed her wrongful dismissal suit in February 2025.

But employment lawyers experience time differently.

“I’ve got files where … stuff’s been happening steadily and consistently, and you’re six years out before you know it,” said employment lawyer Carter Greschner, who also teaches employment law at the University of Alberta.

So, in case you’re not caught up, let’s get you up to speed.

Mentzelopoulos, in her original suit, alleged she was fired after she launched an investigation into various contracts and AHS procurement processes. In its statement of defence, AHS said that it terminated Mentzelopoulos because she wasn’t fulfilling her duties. 

None of the allegations have been tested in court.

The back-and-forth over confidential documents

Both sides have been fighting for months over what evidence should be shared, and what should be given back.

Before Mentzelopoulos was let go, she emailed herself records that she argued she needed to hang on to so as to act as a “whistleblower.” Lawyers for the government and AHS argued she was contractually obligated to return them.

Recently, the judge overseeing the process, Justice Michael Lema, ordered that she must return those records, noting she could request them through the standard court process.

On the flip side, Mentzelopoulos’ legal team argued that the government was holding back relevant records. That same judge said that AHS and the province had to turn those over, so as to fill in “certain gaps and deficiencies.” 

“I would say that’s the more common issue with document production, is that one side says 'we know there's more that you're not giving us,'” Greschner said.

In late October, Lema refused what he called a request from the government to pause the production of records until a government appeal could be heard.

On the same date, Court of Appeal Justice Anne Kirker ordered a pause for the government until a hearing on Nov. 19, with the consent of Mentzelopoulos’s legal team.

Mentzelopoulos' performance at issue

This tug of war over records keeps evolving, too.

In his late October ruling, Lema also ordered AHS and the government to hand over another batch of records regarding Mentzelopoulos' job performance and whether she was ever warned before being fired.

The judge said AHS had a “duty to warn” Mentzelopoulos. 

That means AHS was legally obligated to clearly state concerns, set expectations, allow her to fix performance issues, and warn her that failing to improve could trigger termination with cause, explained Greschner.

Lema previously wrote that the government had opened its amended statement of defence with a “narrow position” — that its contract laid out what would be paid if the agreement was terminated without cause.

But, he added that its defence was also “replete” with complaints about her job performance.

“If the sole focus of the defences was ‘dismissed per contract,’ that is all the defences had to address,” Lema wrote.  

He gave the government and AHS until Nov. 28 to hand over all records relating to her performance assessments, performance concerns, and any warnings provided.

Brett Code, one of the lawyers for former AHS CEO Athana Mentzelopoulos, is pictured outside of court in Edmonton earlier this year. (Peter Evans/CBC)

One of Mentzelopoulos’ lawyers, Brett Code, wrote in a text message to CBC News that he believed Lema had “called out the attempt by the government’s lawyers to reverse claims by the government itself, in particular by [Justice] Minister [Mickey] Amery, that Athana was terminated due to alleged incompetence.”

“At the beginning of all this, the government loudly proclaimed that Athana was incompetent and was fired therefore,” Code said.

“Now, in the face of their obligation to produce relevant and material records … the government’s lawyers are saying that they did not allege performance failures in the government’s statement of defence.

“They appear [to] want to avoid producing records that undermine the government’s incompetence claims.”

A spokesperson for the province, as well as lawyers for the government, declined to comment on the ruling. A spokesperson for AHS did not reply to a request for comment.

What about that RCMP investigation?

After Mentzelopoulos made allegations in her lawsuit, there were several investigations launched into the claims about AHS procurement practices and contracts, including one by the RCMP.

Last month, a letter filed in court revealed that the investigation was focused on alleged fraud, breach of trust, and money laundering.

• RCMP investigating allegations of money laundering, fraud in Alberta health procurement probes

The letter, signed by Crown counsel Tom Andreopoulos, suggested that the investigation involves documents and materials from Mentzelopoulos that “may overlap” with documents at the centre of the ongoing civil case outlined above.

Andreopoulos wrote that the team was “seeking direction” from the Court of King’s Bench about co-ordinating future moves around the material. 

What happens next on the civil front?

To an expert like Greschner, it’s clear that there’s more to come in the coming weeks on the document production front. 

That includes appeals. But the next substantial move could be a summary application, either to dismiss the lawsuit altogether (brought by the defendants), or to award judgment (brought by the plaintiff), he said.

Carter Greschner teaches employment law at the University of Alberta. (Submitted by Carter Greschner)

“Just because an application gets filed, doesn’t mean it always makes it all the way to being heard,” he said.

If it went a more traditional route — to disclosure, questioning and then undertakings — the case is probably, “best-case scenario,” about two years away from trial.

“But if there continue to be the ongoing, procedural battles that have existed so far, it could be four or five years before it got to trial,” Greschner said.