Weatherford Canada Ltd. v. Corlac Inc.

Weatherford Canada Ltd. v. Corlac Inc.

Applying Rule 289 the court ordered only those read-ins necessary to give meaning or source to specific answers and to prevent misleading partial quotations (Tabs 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 13 were added). Proposed additional read-ins that introduced new questions, sought explanation better given viva voce, or extended beyond contextualizing a specific answer were refused (Tabs 3, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 14 and 16 not added). The court emphasized fairness and the option to call witnesses to elaborate.

Citation
2009 FC 449
Parties
Plaintiff (defendant by Counterclaim): Weatherford Canada Ltd.; Plaintiff (defendant by Counterclaim): Weatherford Canada Partnership; Plaintiff (defendant by Counterclaim): Edward Grenke; Plaintiff (defendant by Counterclaim): Grenco Industries Ltd.; Defendant (plaintiff by Counterclaim): Corlac Inc.; Defendant (plaintiff by Counterclaim): National-Oilwell Canada Ltd.; Defendant (plaintiff by Counterclaim): National Oilwell Incorporated
Court
Federal Court
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
4 May 2009
Procedural Posture
Civil: Motion Under Rule 289 Concerning Inclusion of Discovery Transcript Read Ins / Pre Trial Motion (rule 289 Read Ins)
Outcome
Motion granted in part and denied in part
Legal Topics
Rule 289 Read Ins, Examination for Discovery, Contextualization of Testimony, Fairness and Prejudice in Admitting Discovery Evidence
Source Language
English
Civil Procedure Evidence Discovery Commercial Litigation Rule 289 Read Ins Examination for Discovery Contextualization of Testimony Fairness and Prejudice in Admitting Discovery Evidence

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Weatherford Canada Ltd.

Plaintiff (defendant by Counterclaim)

Weatherford Canada Partnership

Plaintiff (defendant by Counterclaim)

Edward Grenke

Plaintiff (defendant by Counterclaim)

Grenco Industries Ltd.

Plaintiff (defendant by Counterclaim)

Corlac Inc.

Defendant (plaintiff by Counterclaim)

National-Oilwell Canada Ltd.

Defendant (plaintiff by Counterclaim)

National Oilwell Incorporated

Defendant (plaintiff by Counterclaim)

Procedural Posture

Civil: Motion Under Rule 289 Concerning Inclusion of Discovery Transcript Read Ins / Pre Trial Motion (rule 289 Read Ins)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether additional portions of discovery transcripts must be read into evidence under Rule 289 to ensure answers fairly reflect the true responses
  2. 2 Whether partial read-ins are misleading without additional context or source identification
  3. 3 Whether proposed read-ins raise new questions or require viva voce evidence and cross-examination

Ratio Decidendi

Applying Rule 289 the court ordered only those read-ins necessary to give meaning or source to specific answers and to prevent misleading partial quotations (Tabs 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 13 were added). Proposed additional read-ins that introduced new questions, sought explanation better given viva voce, or extended beyond contextualizing a specific answer were refused (Tabs 3, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 14 and 16 not added). The court emphasized fairness and the option to call witnesses to elaborate.

Court Disposition

Motion granted in part and denied in part

Orders

  • Tabs 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 13 are added
  • Tabs 3, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 14 and 16 are not added