What is the test for reading in in a defence case?

At the conclusion of the plaintiff’s case the defence sought to read in as part of its case questions 377 to 384 of the examination for discovery of the plaintiff held on March 11, 2005. I declared a voir dire with respect to the read-ins and reserved my decision on the admissibility of the evidence read in. The defence position was that it was necessary to read in the evidence of the plaintiff taken at the examination for discovery so that that evidence would be proof of the statements contained therein. The defence relies on R. 40(27) and the decision of our Court of Appeal in Hickson v. Roberts, 2004 BCCA 335. It is clear from a reading of R. 40(27) that it expressly permits discovery evidence to be used at trial. A review of the Hickson decision makes it abundantly clear that in fact a defendant has the right to read discovery of a plaintiff into evidence as proof of the statements given at the discovery.