• FAIR – supporting auto accident victims through advocacy and education
  • FAIR – supporting auto accident victims through advocacy and education
  • FAIR – supporting auto accident victims through advocacy and education

IME

Tomec v. Magnat, 2015 ONSC 1928 (CanLII)

https://www.canlii.org/en/on/onsc/doc/2015/2015onsc1928/2015onsc1928.html

[34]      Further, the plaintiff asserts that the defendant’s witness, Dr. Clark, repeatedly and in the face of my clear instructions gave improper evidence, which resulted in considerable delay and expense. Further, defence counsel was aware, at least partly, of the change in Dr. Clark’s evidence before he testified; however, the Court was not made aware of it prior to Dr. Clark testifying. As a result, the plaintiff submits that Dr. Clark’s disbursements, totaling $11,450.04, should be eliminated or reduced.

[35]      I qualified Dr. Clark to give expert evidence. He testified that previously he has been qualified to give expert evidence in Superior Court. He either knows, or should know, the rules governing the nature of his testimony. His breaches of those rules resulted in a motion to strike the jury. His breaches caused considerable cost and delay to the trial.

Comments are closed.