Can a witness be physically excluded from a trial?

The third justice of appeal concurred with the reasons of O’Halloran J. who stated: ¶3 . . . (W)e must start with the principle that every person has an inherent right to be present at a trial or any other proceedings to which he is a party. Such a right, however, must not conflict with the fair and proper judicial conduct of the action or proceedings. Inherent rights are invariably accompanied by concomitant duties. For example if a party should act in a manner to disturb the judicial conduct of the trial or proceedings, or persist in failure to conform to accepted rules and procedure, it would not be surprising if the court or presiding judicial official should adjourn the hearing or, if he found it necessary, order that the interrupting party be removed…. ¶ 7 Acceptance of this conclusion does not deny jurisdiction in the court at the trial or in the presiding judicial official at any stage of the proceedings to order the physical exclusion of a party, should a violation of an essential of justice occur or be threatened, if exclusion is not directed. What may constitute such a violation depends on the situation in each case appraised in its own atmosphere, see Bird v. Vieth (1899) 7 BCR 31.