Thanks in advance.
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
What's it called when you take a judge aside to discuss something privately?
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by Janus View PostI think the proper legal term for that is "mistrial"
Lol. I think he might be referring to a voire dire.
This is not YOU talking to the judge privately. It’s both parties lawyers asking for a private discussion on a point of law that may or may not be admissible.
You should probably give us more context?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Comment
-
American courts have a concept called 'sidebar' where counsel will approach the Judge to address a matter in court 'off the record'. This is not a Canadian concept and do not practice this here. Neither lawyers nor self-reps can contact a judge privately about their case. No Judge would entertain such a discussion and if the discussion occurred they would be conflicted out of any further involvement with the file.
A voir dire is a 'trial within a trial'. Usually done in matters with jury trials (such as criminal or certain civil issues) where a piece of evidence may or may not be admissible. The jury is excused and then the Judge rules on if a piece of evidence is or is not allowed. A voir dire can also be done in a trial without a jury, and if the Judge concludes the evidence is not admissible, they are not permitted to rely on it when rendering their decision.
Comment
-
What's it called when you take a judge aside to discuss something privately?
How often this occurs depends on jurisdiction; some judges are more likely to do this, while others will never do this.
Comment
-
Originally posted by OrleansLawyer View PostHow often this occurs depends on jurisdiction; some judges are more likely to do this, while others will never do this.
Toronto - In-chambers discussions are common.
Durham - Rare that either happens.
Halton - One judge there does it a lot.
Hamilton - Mixed bag... Depends on how annoyed Pazaratz is. I haven't seen Chappel ever do it.
Comment
Comment