What is the CRT's process for holding an oral hearing in a personal injury matter?

5. The CRT may decide the format of the hearing, including by writing, telephone, videoconferencing, or a combination of these. Some of the evidence in this dispute amounts to a “he said, he said” scenario about what likely happened. Credibility of interested witnesses, particularly where there is conflict, cannot be determined solely by the test of whose personal demeanour in a courtroom or CRT proceeding appears to be the most truthful. The assessment of what is the most likely account depends on its harmony with the rest of the evidence. In the circumstances here, I find that I am properly able to assess and weigh the documentary evidence and submissions before me. Further, bearing in mind the CRT’s mandate that includes proportionality and a speedy resolution of disputes, I find that an oral hearing is not necessary. I also note the decision Yas v. Pope, 2018 BCSC 282 at paragraphs 32 to 38, in which the court recognized the CRT’s process and that oral hearings are not necessarily required where credibility is in issue.