Governance

Stenograph

Examination Before Reporter

"An examination for discovery must be conducted before an official reporter who is empowered to administer the oath."
Rules of Court, 7-2(12)

Copy Orders

Any party not wanting to pay for copy orders — or, really, any issue with a client not wanting to pay for a transcript — send them to the Supreme Court Civil Rules, specifically Rule 7-2(26), where it says "transcript may be obtained on payment of the proper fee."

grey gavel icon

Good governance is the art of putting wise thought into prudent action in a way that advances the well-being of those governed.

― Diane Kalen-Sukra

Audio Recordings in Discovery

Rassaf v. SNC-Lavalin

Every now and then someone other than the court reporter tries to record a discovery. Justice Goepel states:

"There is no provision in the rule to allow the parties themselves to record the proceedings that take place at the examination for discovery. This is different than the rule governing trials. Pursuant to Rule 12-5(70), the court may authorize a party to use a recording device to record evidence at trial. No such rule applies in regard to examinations for discovery."

Rassaf v. SNC-Lavalin, 2013 BCSC 139 (CanLII), par. 5.

Video Recordings in Discovery

Ribeiro v. The City of Vancouver et al.

In the age of remote discoveries, the subject of videorecording is a hot-button topic. Justice Southin had this to say:

"There is no provision in the Rules of the Supreme Court of British Columbia for the order which was pronounced in this case. Since time immemorial, that is to say since examinations for discovery were first permitted in this province which I think now is about 80 or 90 years ago, they have never been filmed by any method at all. If they are to be, there must be a change in the Rules of the Court to permit or authorize such a practice, or, in my view, there must be at least a practice direction emanating from the whole of the Supreme Court of British Columbia on the point."

Ribeiro v. Vancouver (City), 2004 BCCA 482 (CanLII), par. 3.

Making an Original Transcript Available at Trial

Yurisich v. Malloy

This ruling pertains to a case where the original transcript was ordered by plaintiff's counsel at the examination of the plaintiff but defence counsel then wanted the use of the original at trial. Justice Scarth upheld that plaintiff counsel must make the original available to the court and ruled that the difference in cost of the original transcript versus the copy should be paid by the defendant:

"With respect to costs the plaintiff has, on the appeal, in essence succeeded in maintaining the position he took all along with the defendants, that is, to provide the original transcript to the Court for use at the trial if paid for the cost of that transcript.  The plaintiff is entitled to his costs of the appeal relating to the transcript issue."

Yurisich v. Molloy, 2003 BCSC 202 (CanLII), par. 21.

True democratic governance is doing what your people want, not just what you want for your people.

― Peter-Cole C. Onele

BC Court Transcription Manual

"The British Columbia Court Transcription Manual applies to both Supreme and Provincial Court, unless otherwise stated. The Ministry may amend the British Columbia Court Transcription Manual on instructions from the Judiciary."

Accept No Substitutes

Ensure your reporter is an Official Reporter as governed by the Court Rules Act, Official Reporters Regulation (B.C. Reg. 222/84) and Supreme Court Civil Rules 7-2(12), 7-8(2)(16).

Scroll to Top