2 total
The court ruled that the plaintiff possesses the capacity to testify on a promise to tell the truth.
This decision addresses whether Anne Meehan, a plaintiff in the action, is competent to testify at trial.
The court held a voir dire to determine her testimonial competence, considering her ability to understand the nature of an oath or solemn affirmation and her capacity to communicate evidence.
Despite inconsistencies and some cognitive limitations, the court found that Ms. Meehan demonstrated the necessary capacities to perceive, recollect, and communicate, and ruled that she may testify on a promise to tell the truth.
Under the Evidence Act, a judge must personally examine a witness whose competency is challenged.
This ruling addresses whether Anne Meehan, a plaintiff, is competent to testify at trial.
The court reviews medical assessments of Ms. Meehan’s capacity, the statutory requirements under the Ontario Evidence Act, and the parties’ arguments regarding the necessity and form of a competency examination.
The court concludes that a voir dire is required to determine Ms. Meehan’s competency, as mandated by section 18(2) of the Evidence Act, and clarifies that such an examination need not occur in a formal courtroom setting.
