Can a cross-examination be evenly balanced between the parties?
Alberta, Canada
The following excerpt is from Young v. Young, 1989 CanLII 3315 (AB QB):
It may well be that in the earlier Young v. Young case, as Madam Justice Veit indicated, what did occur there resulted in, and justified, the conclusion that the amicus’ cross-examination was not evenly balanced as between the parties. That can happen, but it is not a reason for denying the lawyer who appears for the amicus curiae, or who may himself be the amicus curiae, cross-examining witnesses.
"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.
Other Questions
Does a plaintiff have to pay costs to both parties even if they have successfully sued only one party? (Alberta, Canada)
Is a party who is not an applicant in a restrictive covenant action against a party that is not a party to the restrictive covenant? (Alberta, Canada)
What is the test for establishing that a party with the onus must prove the relevant facts on a balance of probabilities? (Alberta, Canada)
What is the basis for the principle that a person who is not a party to the same type of accommodation as a party is entitled to a similar accommodation? (Alberta, Canada)
Under what circumstances will a party be permitted to enter into an agreement for sale without the consent of the other party? (Alberta, Canada)
If there is no clear agency between the parties, can the parties be considered fiduciary? (Alberta, Canada)
Is a court bound by law to award costs in favour of the successful party against the unsuccessful party? (Alberta, Canada)
What is the discrimination issue in relation to the even balance principle? (Alberta, Canada)
Does the principle of res judicata apply when one party has brought a new cause of action against the same party? (Alberta, Canada)
What is the test for establishing that a party advancing an action or defence must prove beyond a balance of probabilities? (Alberta, Canada)
