Gollan v. McKibbon

Gollan v. McKibbon

Master Patterson held that Rule 28 is the appropriate procedure and declined to grant the ad hoc authorization; the application for authorization to interview employees of Glenwood Place and School District No. 83 was dismissed and the parties must proceed under Rule 28.

Citation
2003 BCSC 1338
Parties
Plaintiff: Codey Gollan; Defendant; Third Party; Third Party #2: Janis Lea McKibbon; Defendant; Third Party: Tyson Joseph Graham; Defendant; Third Party: Geoffrey Graham
Court
Supreme Court of British Columbia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
16 June 2003
Procedural Posture
Personal Injury Motor Vehicle Accident / Interlocutory Application for Authorization to Interview Witnesses; Oral Reasons Delivered by Master Patterson
Outcome
Application dismissed; Rule 28 procedure to be followed.
Legal Topics
Rule 28 Procedure, Authorization for Interviews of Institutional Employees, Effect of Committee on Procedure, Interlocutory Relief
Source Language
English
Civil Procedure Evidence Personal Injury Capacity/guardianship Rule 28 Procedure Authorization for Interviews of Institutional Employees Effect of Committee on Procedure Interlocutory Relief

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 2 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Codey Gollan

Plaintiff

Janis Lea McKibbon

Defendant; Third Party; Third Party #2

Tyson Joseph Graham

Defendant; Third Party

Geoffrey Graham

Defendant; Third Party

Procedural Posture

Personal Injury Motor Vehicle Accident / Interlocutory Application for Authorization to Interview Witnesses; Oral Reasons Delivered by Master Patterson

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiff must execute an authorization permitting the defendant's solicitor to interview employees of Glenwood Place Group Home and School District No. 83
  2. 2 Whether the informal authorization sought is appropriate where the Rules provide a specific procedure (Rule 28)
  3. 3 Whether the existence of a committee for the plaintiff affects the appropriate procedure

Ratio Decidendi

Master Patterson held that Rule 28 is the appropriate procedure and declined to grant the ad hoc authorization; the application for authorization to interview employees of Glenwood Place and School District No. 83 was dismissed and the parties must proceed under Rule 28.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed; Rule 28 procedure to be followed.

Orders

  • Application for authorization to allow defendant's solicitor to interview Glenwood Place and School District No. 83 denied
  • Paragraphs 2 and 3 of the application dismissed; parties must proceed under Rule 28