Liebmann v. Canada ( Minister of National Defence )
T-306-93
Hargrave P.
15/4/96
20 pp.
Motions for production of third witness for discovery and to require witness to answer questions beyond those dealing with policy including request for re-attendance to answer specific questions-Defendant producing two witnesses for discovery, one to answer questions as to facts, Rear Admiral Johnston and one to answer questions as to policy, Col. Snell-Plaintiff claiming Commander Westropp having specific knowledge as to matter in issue and ought to be examined-Party being examined must put forward proper and knowledgeable witness-Often hearsay evidence offered by witness who informed himself or herself-Witness must be able to give broad discovery, including as to supplemental questions-Onus on party examining to demonstrate objectively unsuitability of witness in application for second discovery-In some instances may be desirable and practical to have individual involved examined rather than have witness inform herself or himself-Expense of second witness factor-Circumstances of case, including responsiveness of witness, degree to which witness has informed himself and materiality of evidence sought to be canvassed with second witness also factors-Plaintiff unable to demonstrate Admiral Johnston unsuitable witness-Able to give broad discovery and able to elaborate on various topics-Also made effort to inform himself between discoveries and responsive and forthcoming witness-Motion for production of third witness denied-Second motion denied-No authority for limiting ambit of discovery but frequently done by agreement of counsel-Plaintiff made no objection to split discovery when nomination made eight months before discovery began-Col. Snell to submit to further discovery voluntarily and no specific questions ordered answered.