The parties have provided their submissions regarding the possibility of having the witness testify by telephone. Briefly, the applicant indicates that the witness is currently out of the province and unreachable by telephone, and in any event, the applicant submits that the witness will provide important evidence upon which a factual determination may turn and it therefore should be provided in person. The respondent submits that in accordance with Zeividavi v. Catholic Immigration Services, 2011 HRTO 406, testimony in person is to be preferred “where the credibility of the witness is a significant issue or where that witness’ evidence is extensive or key to the proceedings”. DECISION
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.