The self-represented appellants appealed a Small Claims Court judgment on the basis of procedural unfairness.
At trial, the respondent was permitted to call witnesses despite failing to provide a witness list in advance.
The trial judge did not advise the appellants of their right to object or request an adjournment, nor did he explain that their Statement of Defence was not evidence.
The Divisional Court allowed the appeal and ordered a new trial, finding that the trial judge failed in his duty to assist the self-represented litigants and compounded the unfairness by drawing an adverse inference from their failure to testify.
