The scope of discovery is defined by the pleadings. Generally a wide scope is given on examination for discovery because of the nature of cross-examination. It will not always be apparent that a question will produce relevant evidence: Kendall v. Sun Life Assurance Company of Canada, 2010 BCSC 1556 at paras. 8 and 10. Kendall also stands for the proposition that in general unless a question is clearly irrelevant it should be answered and objections saved for trial. Applications of the kind before me add to the cost of litigation and should, as a rule, be avoided.
"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.