The defendants brought a motion seeking to exclude the plaintiff from the examination for discovery of the defendant C.H., who alleged sexual assault by the plaintiff when C.H. was a minor.
The plaintiff denied the allegations and opposed exclusion, asserting his right to be present.
The court, considering medical evidence of C.H.'s distress and drawing parallels to testimonial accommodations in criminal law (e.g., Criminal Code s. 486.2), ordered a testimonial accommodation.
C.H. was to be examined in a separate room, with the plaintiff observing via closed-circuit television.
The court clarified that such accommodation does not imply an admission of guilt and that the additional costs would be borne by the defendants.