To put the [the defendants'] argument in perspective, imagine J. K. Rowling is deposed at an examination for discovery in Alberta. A copy of her book, Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone (U.K.: Bloomsbury, 1997), is placed before her. She is asked "Is this, to the best of your knowledge, a copy of the book you authored? Is that the date of publication? You see here the publication date. Does that refresh your memory?" Ms. Rowling responds affirmatively to all of these questions. According to the appellants' theory, reading in these statements at trial incorporates the document referred to, in this case the Harry Potter novel, in the read-in. The entire book is admitted for its truth. Yet I highly doubt any Alberta court would order seizure of the golden snitch on the basis of this read-in.
The analogy may seem fanciful because everyone knows Harry Potter is fiction. But how does anyone know Mr. Mallet's statement to the insurer is not fiction?
Foley v. Alberta (Administrator, Motor Vehicle Accident Claims Act) |
2002 CarswellAlta 1623 |
Alberta Court of Appeal