The appellant, an insurer of cargo damaged in a maritime collision, appealed the dismissal of its action against the owners of the anchored ship.
The trial judge had refused to hear expert evidence because she was assisted by assessors, following settled Federal Court practice.
The Supreme Court of Canada allowed the appeal and ordered a new trial, holding that the rule against expert evidence where a judge sits with assessors is a procedural rule that violates the audi alteram partem principle.
The Court revised the rule to permit expert evidence and require disclosure of advice given by assessors on matters of fact.
