Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Trial - Rule 23 (11.1) b - Calling opposing party

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Trial - Rule 23 (11.1) b - Calling opposing party

    I am the Respondent to an Application.
    Separation Agreement in place for 6 years. Divorced. All property settled.
    Trial is scheduled for early March 2020.

    Trial Endorsement lists the Applicant as an Applicant's witness and Respondent (me) as Respondent witness.

    I now want to conduct Examination In Chief of the Applicant.

    Questions:
    1) How should I add the Applicant
    2) Do I follow Rule 23 11.1 b and if yes then is there a court form needed or is a letter to her lawyer sufficient?
    3) Does this notice require special service?
    4) Do I need a motion to add this witness to my list?
    5) Can they object to being called?

  • #2
    Anyone have any experience?

    Comment


    • #3
      If you are the Respondent you DO NOT want to do examination in chief of the Applicant. You want to conduct cross-examination.

      Examination in chief is more restrictive and intended only for your own witnesses. Cross examination is unrestricted (mostly) and you have a lot more freedom in the questions you can ask.

      Both parties are presumed to be available for cross examination as a matter of right, you do not need to file documents.

      Comment


      • #4
        Am I limited in scope of questioning on cross to the subject matter introduced during the Examination In Chief by Applicant's counsel or can I introduce new subject matter. That is my concern.

        Comment


        • #5
          No. You are limited only to the causes of action in the trial, not just what was brought up in chief. Although even then there is discretion from the Judge.

          For example, you can ask about parenting even if they say nothing about parenting in chief, if parenting is at issue. You cannot ask what colour your ex's car is .. unless you can show it is somehow relevant to the issues at hand.

          Comment


          • #6
            Thank you! Given they are claiming sole custody vs joint as per a 5 year old agreement, ridiculous special expenses without consent and more ridiculous support arrears (false) I think that leaves me wide open then. I think I am dealing with avery sloppy lawyer on the other side. The pre-trial judges have as much as said so and duty counsel told me the word is I am looking very good. I want to keep it that way.

            Comment

            Our Divorce Forums
            Forums dedicated to helping people all across Canada get through the separation and divorce process, with discussions about legal issues, parenting issues, financial issues and more.
            Working...
            X