Small Claims Trial Preparation (20:XIII) - Revision history

Nate Russell: Reverted edits by Nate Russell (talk) to last revision by LSLAP

2025-11-27T23:29:58Z

Reverted edits by Nate Russell (talk) to last revision by LSLAP

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:29, 27 November 2025
Line 10:		Line 10:
	A tabbed trial binder helps a party to effectively present its case at trial. A suggested format is:		A tabbed trial binder helps a party to effectively present its case at trial. A suggested format is:

	{\| class="wikitable"		{\| class="wikitable"
	\|-		\|-
	~~! style="width~~: ~~14%; white-space:nowrap;"~~ \|		\| '''Tab 1:''' \|\| Opening Statement: a brief summary of the issues in the case.
	~~! style="width~~: ~~86%;" \|~~
	\|-		\|-
	\| '''Tab~~ 1~~:''' \|\| ~~Opening Statement~~: a ~~brief summary of the issues in the case~~.		\| '''Tab 2:''' \|\| Pleadings: all filed documents in chronological order with a list or index.
	\|-		\|-
	\| '''Tab~~ 2~~:''' \|\| ~~Pleadings~~: all ~~filed documents in chronological order with a list or index~~.		\| '''Tab 3:''' \|\| Orders: all court orders that have been made.
	\|-		\|-
	\| '''Tab~~ 3~~:''' \|\| ~~Orders~~: ~~all court orders that have been made~~.		\| '''Tab 4:''' \|\| Claimant’s Case: anticipated evidence of the claimant and claimant’s witnesses, including reminders for the introduction of exhibits and blank pages for taking notes of the cross-examination.
	\|-		\|-
	\| '''Tab~~ 4~~:''' \|\| ~~Claimant’s~~ Case: ~~anticipated evidence of the claimant and claimant’s witnesses, including reminders for the introduction of exhibits and~~ blank pages for ~~taking~~ notes of the cross-examination.		\| '''Tab 5:''' \|\| Defendant’s Case: blank pages for notes of the direct examination of defendant and defendant’s witnesses and anticipated cross-examination questions.
	\|-		\|-
	\| '''Tab~~ 5~~:''' \|\| ~~Defendant’s Case~~: ~~blank pages for notes~~ of the ~~direct examination~~ of ~~defendant~~ and ~~defendant’s witnesses and anticipated cross-examination questions~~.		\| '''Tab 6:''' \|\| Closing Arguments/Submissions: a brief review of the evidence, suggested ways to reconcile conflicts in the evidence, a review of only the most persuasive case law and its application to the facts.
	\|-		\|-
	\| '''Tab~~ 6~~:''' \|\| ~~Closing Arguments/Submissions~~: ~~a brief review~~ of the ~~evidence~~, ~~suggested ways to reconcile conflicts in~~ the ~~evidence, a review of only~~ the ~~most persuasive case law~~ and ~~its application~~ to ~~the facts~~.		\| '''Tab 7:''' \|\| Case Law: prepare three copies of each case relied on (for you, the judge, and the opposing party). Carefully scrutinize the need for multiple cases to support your argument and limit yourself to as few as possible.
	\|-		\|-
	\| '''Tab~~ 7~~:''' \|\| ~~Case Law~~: ~~prepare~~ three copies ~~of each case relied on~~ (for you, the judge, and the opposing party). ~~Carefully scrutinize the~~ need ~~for multiple cases~~ to ~~support your argument~~ and ~~limit yourself~~ to ~~as few as possible~~.		\| '''Tab 8:''' \|\| Exhibits: you will need the original (the exhibit) and three copies (for you, the judge, and the opposing party). You need to be able to prove when, why, and by whom the exhibit was created, and also be able to argue why it is relevant (i.e. document plan or photograph).
	\|-		\|-
	\| '''Tab 8:''' \|\| Exhibits: you will need the original (the exhibit) and three copies (for you, the judge, and the opposing party). You need to be able to prove when, why, and by whom the exhibit was created, and also be able to argue why it is relevant (i.e. document plan or photograph).		\| '''Tab 9:''' \|\| Miscellaneous: any additional documents, notes, lists, and correspondence.
	\|-
	~~\| '''Tab ~~9:''' \|\| Miscellaneous: any additional documents, notes, lists, and correspondence.
	\|}		\|}

Nate Russell: /* A. Trial Binder */

2025-11-27T23:28:48Z

A. Trial Binder

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:28, 27 November 2025
Line 10:		Line 10:
	A tabbed trial binder helps a party to effectively present its case at trial. A suggested format is:		A tabbed trial binder helps a party to effectively present its case at trial. A suggested format is:

	{\| class="wikitable~~" style="width:100%;~~"		{\| class="wikitable"
	\|-		\|-
	! style="width: 14%; white-space:nowrap;" \|		! style="width: 14%; white-space:nowrap;" \|

Nate Russell: /* A. Trial Binder */

2025-11-27T23:28:03Z

A. Trial Binder

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:28, 27 November 2025
Line 10:		Line 10:
	A tabbed trial binder helps a party to effectively present its case at trial. A suggested format is:		A tabbed trial binder helps a party to effectively present its case at trial. A suggested format is:

	{\| class="wikitable"		{\| class="wikitable" style="width:100%;"
	\|-		\|-
	\| ~~'''Tab 1~~:~~''' \|~~\| ~~Opening Statement: a brief summary of the issues in the case.~~		! style="width: 14%; white-space:nowrap;" \|
			! style="width: 86%;" \|
	\|-		\|-
	\| '''Tab 2:''' \|\| ~~Pleadings~~: ~~all filed documents~~ in ~~chronological order with a list or index~~.		\| '''Tab 1:''' \|\| Opening Statement: a brief summary of the issues in the case.
	\|-		\|-
	\| '''Tab 3:''' \|\| ~~Orders~~: all ~~court orders that have been made~~.		\| '''Tab 2:''' \|\| Pleadings: all filed documents in chronological order with a list or index.
	\|-		\|-
	\| '''Tab 4:''' \|\| ~~Claimant’s Case~~: ~~anticipated evidence of the claimant and claimant’s witnesses, including reminders for the introduction of exhibits and blank pages for taking notes of the cross-examination~~.		\| '''Tab 3:''' \|\| Orders: all court orders that have been made.
	\|-		\|-
	\| '''Tab 5:''' \|\| ~~Defendant’s~~ Case: blank pages for notes of the ~~direct examination of defendant and defendant’s witnesses and anticipated~~ cross-examination ~~questions~~.		\| '''Tab 4:''' \|\| Claimant’s Case: anticipated evidence of the claimant and claimant’s witnesses, including reminders for the introduction of exhibits and blank pages for taking notes of the cross-examination.
	\|-		\|-
	\| '''Tab 6:''' \|\| ~~Closing Arguments/Submissions~~: ~~a brief review~~ of the ~~evidence, suggested ways to reconcile conflicts in the evidence, a review~~ of ~~only the most persuasive case law~~ and ~~its application to the facts~~.		\| '''Tab 5:''' \|\| Defendant’s Case: blank pages for notes of the direct examination of defendant and defendant’s witnesses and anticipated cross-examination questions.
	\|-		\|-
	\| '''Tab 7:''' \|\| ~~Case Law~~: ~~prepare three copies~~ of ~~each case relied on (for you~~, the ~~judge~~, ~~and~~ the ~~opposing party). Carefully scrutinize the need for multiple cases to support your argument~~ and ~~limit yourself~~ to ~~as few as possible~~.		\| '''Tab 6:''' \|\| Closing Arguments/Submissions: a brief review of the evidence, suggested ways to reconcile conflicts in the evidence, a review of only the most persuasive case law and its application to the facts.
	\|-		\|-
	\| '''Tab 8:''' \|\| ~~Exhibits~~: ~~you will need the original (the exhibit) and~~ three copies (for you, the judge, and the opposing party). ~~You~~ need to ~~be able to prove when, why,~~ and ~~by whom the exhibit was created, and also be able~~ to ~~argue why it is relevant (i.e. document plan or photograph)~~.		\| '''Tab 7:''' \|\| Case Law: prepare three copies of each case relied on (for you, the judge, and the opposing party). Carefully scrutinize the need for multiple cases to support your argument and limit yourself to as few as possible.
	\|-		\|-
	\| '''Tab 9:''' \|\| Miscellaneous: any additional documents, notes, lists, and correspondence.		\| '''Tab 8:''' \|\| Exhibits: you will need the original (the exhibit) and three copies (for you, the judge, and the opposing party). You need to be able to prove when, why, and by whom the exhibit was created, and also be able to argue why it is relevant (i.e. document plan or photograph).
			\|-
			\| '''Tab 9:''' \|\| Miscellaneous: any additional documents, notes, lists, and correspondence.
	\|}		\|}

LSLAP at 19:41, 13 October 2025

2025-10-13T19:41:51Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:41, 13 October 2025
Line 1:		Line 1:
	{{REVIEWED LSLAP \| date= ~~12 August~~ 2025}}		{{REVIEWED LSLAP \| date= 11 July 2025}}
	{{LSLAP Manual TOC\|expanded = smallclaims}}		{{LSLAP Manual TOC\|expanded = smallclaims}}

LSLAP: /* B. Expert Witnesses */

2025-09-29T15:40:36Z

B. Expert Witnesses

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:40, 29 September 2025
Line 37:		Line 37:
	Whether expert evidence is necessary is a contextual consideration and it can sometimes be unclear when it is required; however, it can be very important as a failure to provide expert evidence when it is required can result in the failure of a party’s claim. If you are unsure about whether you need expert evidence for your claim, seek legal advice.		Whether expert evidence is necessary is a contextual consideration and it can sometimes be unclear when it is required; however, it can be very important as a failure to provide expert evidence when it is required can result in the failure of a party’s claim. If you are unsure about whether you need expert evidence for your claim, seek legal advice.

	Expert evidence is generally required to establish the standard of care of a professional, such as a contractor. The main exceptions to this rule are when the professional’s work was obviously substandard or when the issue is not technical ''[(https://canlii.ca/t/hxlzj Schellenberg v. Wawanesa Mutual Insurance Company]'', 2019 BCSC 196).		Expert evidence is generally required to establish the standard of care of a professional, such as a contractor. The main exceptions to this rule are when the professional’s work was obviously substandard or when the issue is not technical (''[https://canlii.ca/t/hxlzj Schellenberg v. Wawanesa Mutual Insurance Company]'', 2019 BCSC 196).

	The expert’s testimony cannot include the expert’s assessment of the credibility of either the claimant or the defendant (''Movahed v Leung'', [1998] BCJ No. 1210; ''[http://canlii.ca/t/5c62 Brough v Richmond]'', 2003 BCSC 512; and ''[http://canlii.ca/t/1w9v9 Campbell v Sveinungsen]'', 2008 BCSC 381). Expert witness testimony is inadmissible if it relates to issues that the court is capable of understanding and analyzing without assistance (''Sengbusch v Priest'', [1987] 14 BCLR (2d) 26 (BCSC)).		The expert’s testimony cannot include the expert’s assessment of the credibility of either the claimant or the defendant (''Movahed v Leung'', [1998] BCJ No. 1210; ''[http://canlii.ca/t/5c62 Brough v Richmond]'', 2003 BCSC 512; and ''[http://canlii.ca/t/1w9v9 Campbell v Sveinungsen]'', 2008 BCSC 381). Expert witness testimony is inadmissible if it relates to issues that the court is capable of understanding and analyzing without assistance (''Sengbusch v Priest'', [1987] 14 BCLR (2d) 26 (BCSC)).

LSLAP: /* B. Expert Witnesses */

2025-09-29T15:40:04Z

B. Expert Witnesses

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:40, 29 September 2025
Line 33:		Line 33:
	== B. Expert Witnesses ==		== B. Expert Witnesses ==

	Expert witness testimony is not admissible unless their expertise and special knowledge are: (1) necessary for the court to understand the issues (i.e., the subject matter of the dispute is outside the knowledge of an ordinary person) ([http://canlii.ca/t/1frt1 ''R. v Mohan'', [1994<nowiki>]</nowiki> 2 SCR 9]) or (2) provides useful '''context''' to difficult evidence for the benefit of the trier of fact [http://canlii.ca/t/glj0n ''Anderson v Canada (Attorney General)'', 2015 CarswellNfld 381 (NLTD)]).		Expert witness testimony is not admissible unless their expertise and special knowledge are: (1) necessary for the court to understand the issues (i.e., the subject matter of the dispute is outside the knowledge of an ordinary person) (''[http://canlii.ca/t/1frt1 R. v Mohan]'', [1994<nowiki>]</nowiki> 2 SCR 9) or (2) provides useful '''context''' to difficult evidence for the benefit of the trier of fact ''[http://canlii.ca/t/glj0n Anderson v Canada (Attorney General)]'', 2015 CarswellNfld 381 (NLTD)).

	Whether expert evidence is necessary is a contextual consideration and it can sometimes be unclear when it is required; however, it can be very important as a failure to provide expert evidence when it is required can result in the failure of a party’s claim. If you are unsure about whether you need expert evidence for your claim, seek legal advice.		Whether expert evidence is necessary is a contextual consideration and it can sometimes be unclear when it is required; however, it can be very important as a failure to provide expert evidence when it is required can result in the failure of a party’s claim. If you are unsure about whether you need expert evidence for your claim, seek legal advice.

	Expert evidence is generally required to establish the standard of care of a professional, such as a contractor. The main exceptions to this rule are when the professional’s work was obviously substandard or when the issue is not technical [(https://canlii.ca/t/hxlzj Schellenberg v. Wawanesa Mutual Insurance Company, 2019 BCSC 196)].		Expert evidence is generally required to establish the standard of care of a professional, such as a contractor. The main exceptions to this rule are when the professional’s work was obviously substandard or when the issue is not technical ''[(https://canlii.ca/t/hxlzj Schellenberg v. Wawanesa Mutual Insurance Company]'', 2019 BCSC 196).

	The expert’s testimony cannot include the expert’s assessment of the credibility of either the claimant or the defendant (''Movahed v Leung'', [1998] BCJ No. 1210; [http://canlii.ca/t/5c62 ''Brough v Richmond'', 2003 BCSC 512]; and [http://canlii.ca/t/1w9v9 ''Campbell v Sveinungsen'', 2008 BCSC 381]). Expert witness testimony is inadmissible if it relates to issues that the court is capable of understanding and analyzing without assistance (''Sengbusch v Priest'', [1987] 14 BCLR (2d) 26 (BCSC)).		The expert’s testimony cannot include the expert’s assessment of the credibility of either the claimant or the defendant (''Movahed v Leung'', [1998] BCJ No. 1210; ''[http://canlii.ca/t/5c62 Brough v Richmond]'', 2003 BCSC 512; and ''[http://canlii.ca/t/1w9v9 Campbell v Sveinungsen]'', 2008 BCSC 381). Expert witness testimony is inadmissible if it relates to issues that the court is capable of understanding and analyzing without assistance (''Sengbusch v Priest'', [1987] 14 BCLR (2d) 26 (BCSC)).

	For more information on expert testimony, see the Provincial Court’s Small Claims Guide: https://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/justice/courthouse-services/small-claims/how-to-guides/getting-ready#7f.		For more information on expert testimony, see the Provincial Court’s Small Claims Guide: https://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/justice/courthouse-services/small-claims/how-to-guides/getting-ready#7f.
Line 68:		Line 68:
	* any other factors the tribunal considers appropriate (''CRTR'', Rule 8.4(1)).		* any other factors the tribunal considers appropriate (''CRTR'', Rule 8.4(1)).

	In addition, for disputes filed under the CRT’s motor vehicle injury jurisdiction, the tribunal may order an independent medical examination on its own behest or at the request of one of the parties (''CRTR'', Rule 8.5(1)). A party who cannot afford to pay the cost of obtaining expert evidence in a motor vehicle injury dispute can ask that the tribunal order another party to pay, although this is contingent on the other party’s ability to pay and the likelihood that the requesting party’s claim will be successful (''CRTR'', Rule 8.6).		In addition, for disputes filed under the CRT’s motor vehicle injury jurisdiction, the tribunal may order an independent medical examination on its own behest or at the request of one of the parties (''CRTR'', Rule 8.5(1)). A party who cannot afford to pay the cost of obtaining expert evidence in a motor vehicle injury dispute can ask that the tribunal order another party to pay, although this is contingent on the other party’s ability to pay and the likelihood that the requesting party’s claim will be successful (''CRTR'', Rule 8.6).

	== C. Witness Preparation ==		== C. Witness Preparation ==

LSLAP: /* 3. Arranging an Interpreter */

2025-09-29T15:38:49Z

3. Arranging an Interpreter

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:38, 29 September 2025
Line 94:		Line 94:
	=== 3. Arranging an Interpreter ===		=== 3. Arranging an Interpreter ===

	Trials and hearings are conducted in English. If a party or the party’s witness does not speak English, the party must arrange for an interpreter to be present. There is a list of interpreters available from the court registry however the court does not certify interpreters ([http://canlii.ca/t/fw93h ''Sandhu v British Columbia'', 2013 BCCA 88]). A party may use any person who is competent to reliably, accurately, and competently translate what is said in court; the judge has, however, discretion to reject the party’s choice of an interpreter.		Trials and hearings are conducted in English. If a party or the party’s witness does not speak English, the party must arrange for an interpreter to be present. There is a list of interpreters available from the court registry however the court does not certify interpreters (''[http://canlii.ca/t/fw93h Sandhu v British Columbia]'', 2013 BCCA 88). A party may use any person who is competent to reliably, accurately, and competently translate what is said in court; the judge has, however, discretion to reject the party’s choice of an interpreter.

	An interpreter should be prepared to testify as to their experience and training. An interpreter who is related to a party may be rejected on the basis of potential bias and an interpreter who is inexperienced or untrained may be rejected on the basis of incompetence. If a party does not arrange an interpreter for a hearing or if the court rejects the interpreter, the party may be liable for a penalty and the reasonable costs of the other party. The party requiring an interpreter should ask the judge at the settlement or trial conference to decide whether the chosen interpreter is acceptable.		An interpreter should be prepared to testify as to their experience and training. An interpreter who is related to a party may be rejected on the basis of potential bias and an interpreter who is inexperienced or untrained may be rejected on the basis of incompetence. If a party does not arrange an interpreter for a hearing or if the court rejects the interpreter, the party may be liable for a penalty and the reasonable costs of the other party. The party requiring an interpreter should ask the judge at the settlement or trial conference to decide whether the chosen interpreter is acceptable.

	The party requiring the interpreter is responsible for the costs of the interpreter; these costs can be, however, recovered if the party is successful at trial.		The party requiring the interpreter is responsible for the costs of the interpreter; these costs can be, however, recovered if the party is successful at trial.

	=== 4. General Advice for Witnesses ===		=== 4. General Advice for Witnesses ===

LSLAP: /* D. Documentary Evidence */

2025-09-22T17:43:16Z

D. Documentary Evidence

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:43, 22 September 2025
Line 122:		Line 122:
	:'''NOTE:''' A judge may examine and compare headshots or handwriting, but should only place very limited weight on their own judgment in these situations (''[http://canlii.ca/t/1fr59 R. v Nikolovski]'',[1996] CanLII 158 SCC; and ''[http://canlii.ca/t/6hcz R. v Abdi]'', [1997] CanLII 4448 Ont CA).		:'''NOTE:''' A judge may examine and compare headshots or handwriting, but should only place very limited weight on their own judgment in these situations (''[http://canlii.ca/t/1fr59 R. v Nikolovski]'',[1996] CanLII 158 SCC; and ''[http://canlii.ca/t/6hcz R. v Abdi]'', [1997] CanLII 4448 Ont CA).

	The CRT decides whether the hearing is held in writing, orally, or a combination of the two (''CRT Rules ~~(effective May 1, 2021)~~'', ~~Rules~~ 9.1). CRT disputes are almost always done in writing. As such evidence rules differ from those at Court. Refer to Part 8 of the CRT Rules for information about evidence: https://civilresolutionbc.ca/resources/rules-and-policies/.		The CRT decides whether the hearing is held in writing, orally, or a combination of the two (''CRT Rules'', Rule 9.1). CRT disputes are almost always done in writing. As such evidence rules differ from those at Court. Refer to Part 8 of the CRT Rules for information about evidence: https://civilresolutionbc.ca/resources/rules-and-policies/.


	{{LSLAP Manual Navbox\|type=chapters15-23}}		{{LSLAP Manual Navbox\|type=chapters15-23}}

Nate Russell: review confirmed 2025

2025-08-29T00:11:48Z

review confirmed 2025

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:11, 29 August 2025
Line 1:		Line 1:
	{{REVIEWED LSLAP \| date= ~~July 31, 2024~~}}		{{REVIEWED LSLAP \| date= 12 August 2025}}
	{{LSLAP Manual TOC\|expanded = smallclaims}}		{{LSLAP Manual TOC\|expanded = smallclaims}}

LSLAP at 22:13, 12 August 2025

2025-08-12T22:13:55Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:13, 12 August 2025
Line 41:		Line 41:
	The expert’s testimony cannot include the expert’s assessment of the credibility of either the claimant or the defendant (''Movahed v Leung'', [1998] BCJ No. 1210; [http://canlii.ca/t/5c62 ''Brough v Richmond'', 2003 BCSC 512]; and [http://canlii.ca/t/1w9v9 ''Campbell v Sveinungsen'', 2008 BCSC 381]). Expert witness testimony is inadmissible if it relates to issues that the court is capable of understanding and analyzing without assistance (''Sengbusch v Priest'', [1987] 14 BCLR (2d) 26 (BCSC)).		The expert’s testimony cannot include the expert’s assessment of the credibility of either the claimant or the defendant (''Movahed v Leung'', [1998] BCJ No. 1210; [http://canlii.ca/t/5c62 ''Brough v Richmond'', 2003 BCSC 512]; and [http://canlii.ca/t/1w9v9 ''Campbell v Sveinungsen'', 2008 BCSC 381]). Expert witness testimony is inadmissible if it relates to issues that the court is capable of understanding and analyzing without assistance (''Sengbusch v Priest'', [1987] 14 BCLR (2d) 26 (BCSC)).

	For more information on expert testimony, see the Provincial Court’s Small Claims Guide (https://~~www~~.~~provincialcourt~~.bc.ca/~~downloads~~/~~smallclaims~~/~~Small%20Claims%20Guide.pdf). Expert evidence is addressed on pages 11~~-~~13 and sample expert reports are provided on pages 56~~-~~60 and 65~~-66.		For more information on expert testimony, see the Provincial Court’s Small Claims Guide: https://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/justice/courthouse-services/small-claims/how-to-guides/getting-ready#7f.

	=== 1. Small Claims ===		=== 1. Small Claims ===
Line 78:		Line 78:
	=== 1. Ensuring Attendance ===		=== 1. Ensuring Attendance ===

	Each party must ensure that its witnesses will attend court. If a party is not absolutely certain that a witness will attend, the witness should be personally served with Form 8: Summons to a Witness together with reasonably estimated traveling expense at least 7 days before the witness is required to appear (''SCR'', Rules 9(1)-(3)). The minimum traveling expenses must cover round-trip, economy fare such as bus fare to and from the court. While lost salary and other expenses do not have to be paid, a party should be reasonable and generous if possible to avoid making a witness bear the cost of litigation.		Each party must ensure that its witnesses will attend court. If a party is not absolutely certain that a witness will attend, the witness should be personally served with Form 8: Summons to a Witness together with reasonably estimated traveling expense at least 7 days before the witness is required to appear (''SCR'', Rules 9(1)-(3)). The minimum traveling expenses must cover round-trip, economy fare such as bus fare to and from the court. For a summons to appear by another method of attendance, the party must offer the reasonable estimated cost of the telephone call, video conference, or other method of attendance (''SCR'', Rule 9(2)(b)). While lost salary and other expenses do not have to be paid, a party should be reasonable and generous if possible to avoid making a witness bear the cost of litigation.

	If a witness who has been served with a summons does not appear at trial, the summoning party may ask the judge for an adjournment or a warrant of arrest (Form 9; ''SCR'', Rules 9(7) and 14)).		If a witness who has been served with a summons does not appear at trial, the summoning party may ask the judge for an adjournment or a warrant of arrest (Form 9; ''SCR'', Rules 9(7) and 14)).
Line 116:		Line 116:
	Before a document can be marked as an exhibit, it must be authenticated. The witness must identify its origins and that it is a true copy. Give the original document and a copy to the clerk and ask the clerk to show the original to the witness. Ask the witness to identify it: “I’m showing you a letter dated...”, “Do you recognize it?”, “Is this your signature?” or “Is it addressed to you?” When the witness has identified its origins and there are no objections, ask the judge to accept it as an exhibit: “May this be marked exhibit #1?”		Before a document can be marked as an exhibit, it must be authenticated. The witness must identify its origins and that it is a true copy. Give the original document and a copy to the clerk and ask the clerk to show the original to the witness. Ask the witness to identify it: “I’m showing you a letter dated...”, “Do you recognize it?”, “Is this your signature?” or “Is it addressed to you?” When the witness has identified its origins and there are no objections, ask the judge to accept it as an exhibit: “May this be marked exhibit #1?”

	Unless the court orders otherwise, Affidavits and Exhibits in small claims proceedings must be no longer than 25 pages in total, cannot be provided on a USB stick or other electronic data storage device, including a video or audio file. For more rules on the content and format of documentary evidence, see https://~~www.~~provincialcourt.bc.ca/~~downloads~~/~~Practice%20Directions~~/~~SMCL03~~.pdf.		Unless the court orders otherwise, Affidavits and Exhibits in small claims proceedings must be no longer than 25 pages in total, cannot be provided on a USB stick or other electronic data storage device, including a video or audio file. For more rules on the content and format of documentary evidence, see https://provincialcourt.bc.ca/system/files/SM-CL-03.pdf.

	:'''NOTE:''' In exceptional circumstances, the judge may permit a witness to provide evidence by affidavit rather than testifying at trial (''[http://canlii.ca/t/1l561 Withler and Fitzsimonds v Attorney General (Canada)]'', 2005 BCSC 1044 (CanLII), para 18; and ''[http://canlii.ca/t/fkr60 Sangha v Reliance]'', 2011 BCSC 371).		:'''NOTE:''' In exceptional circumstances, the judge may permit a witness to provide evidence by affidavit rather than testifying at trial (''[http://canlii.ca/t/1l561 Withler and Fitzsimonds v Attorney General (Canada)]'', 2005 BCSC 1044 (CanLII), para 18; and ''[http://canlii.ca/t/fkr60 Sangha v Reliance]'', 2011 BCSC 371).