When will a jury be required to examine documents in a civil case?
British Columbia, Canada
The following excerpt is from Reischer v. Love & ICBC, 2005 BCSC 1352 (CanLII):
Moreover, as this court held in Esposito v. Abbotsford (City), [2003] B.C.J. No. 2720 (S.C.), even if a “prolonged” examination of documents is required and the issues are complex, a jury’s involvement is appropriate since its finding on the crucial issue of credibility will not be too intricate or complex for it to understand or apply.
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.
Other Questions
What is the case law on the re-opening of a plaintiff’s case in a civil case? (British Columbia, Canada)
Is this a case driven by documents rather than documents? (British Columbia, Canada)
What is the relevance of Rule 11‑6(4) of the Rules of Civil Procedure and Procedure requiring a physical examination? (British Columbia, Canada)
Can counsel for the party being examined on examination for discovery interfere on cross-examination? (British Columbia, Canada)
What is the standard of review required for a project to be successful in a civil case? (British Columbia, Canada)
In what circumstances will a civil court require a higher degree of probability than it would require for a criminal court to consider whether negligence was established? (British Columbia, Canada)
Can a lawyer who fails to put a proposition of evidence to a witness in cross-examination in a civil matter be held liable to sue the witness in a criminal case? (British Columbia, Canada)
What is the standard of proof required to establish reasonable grounds in civil cases? (British Columbia, Canada)
Is there any case law or case law that would require the court to conduct a minute analysis of a joint bank account? (British Columbia, Canada)
In a Workers’s Compensation Appeal Tribunal case, is there any case law that supports the argument that there is no case law in favour of a claim under the Employment Benefits Act? (British Columbia, Canada)
