RCP r. 31.03(1): A party to an action may examine for discovery any other party adverse in interest, once, and may examine that party more than once only with leave of the court, but a party may examine more than one person as permitted by subrules (2) to (8).
Each side is entitled to discover a representative from a party adverse in interest, follows documents; typically plaintiff interviews defendant and vice versa but can be any party adverse in interest (e.g. co-defendants)
31.03 (2) Corporations: examining party can select any (or more than one) officer
Format: party given “notice of examination”; typically oral, but can be written or done by video conference; typically in lawyer’s boardroom; court reporter is present, transcript created; under oath (RCP rr. 31,34-36)
Typically seven hours, except on consent (Apotex) or with leave (RCP r. 31.05.1); e.g. for complicated multi- party cases
Strategy: implications for who you name as a party, but has to be in good faith; try to get material fact evidence
Objections: questions that are irrelevant or privileged (RCP r. 34.12); might undertake to get back to them (RCP r. 5.1-6) or “take the question under advisement” which imposes no duty to give a response to the question
Use at Trial: read in (admission) - either call witness and ask same questions or read the transcript under oath
into the court transcript; and impeachment (using prior inconsistent statements) to show a witness is lying/isn’t
credible (RCP r. 31.11)
Also potentially when person examined not available (limited circumstances, with leave) (RCPr. 31.11(6))
Important ethics/civility implications, particularly in sensitive trials
PRIVILEGE
Exception to spirit of production/disclosure, some types of relevant information are deemed privileged and do not need to be produced/disclosed