Court Rejects ICBC’s Application to Conduct Prolonged Examination of Our ClientPosted on by Mussio Goodman
Mussio Goodman Successful Against ICBC Question Tactics
Mussio Goodman is pleased to announce our success in opposing ICBC’s application to subject our client to further questioning by their defence lawyer.
ICBC sought a court order to increase the permitted time to question our client under oath, which is known as an “examination for discovery”.
Under the Rules of Court, in this case, an examination of discovery cannot last longer than two hours unless all parties consent or the Court orders it. We argued that two hours was more than sufficient to examine our client, who was a passenger in a vehicle that was involved in a hit and run collision.
In spite of our client’s medical records and family doctor’s opinion indicating no significant pre-existing health issues, ICBC sought to question our client about, among other issues, a concussion that she sustained as a child.
The Court dismissed ICBC’s application on the basis that if the defence lawyer were succinct and efficient with their questioning, then the two hours would be more than adequate.
The Court further agreed with our submissions that a concussion that occurred more than 20 years ago was irrelevant and in no way warranted an additional examination.
This decision underscores the importance of consulting a lawyer to ensure ICBC is being held in check, and that your rights and privacy are protected over the course of your ICBC injury claim.Tweet