What is the test for producing incriminating documents in a witness box?
British Columbia, Canada
The following excerpt is from National Financial Services Corp. v. Wolverton Securities Ltd., 1998 CanLII 6607 (BC SC):
Because such individuals are not viewed as having produced incriminating documents in their individual capacities, evidence concerning the act of production is inadmissible against the individual at a criminal trial: United States v. Dean, 989 F.2d 1205 at 1207 (D.C. Cir. 1993).
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.
Other Questions
Is the Minister of Justice required to produce a list of documents to be produced at the next stage of an extradition hearing? (British Columbia, Canada)
Can an individual who acts as an agent of a corporate defendant assert a privilege against self-incrimination when asked to produce documents in a personal injury action? (British Columbia, Canada)
In what circumstances will a witness be required to fully disclose his or her personal information to a witness? (British Columbia, Canada)
Is evidence of a statement made to a witness by a person who is not himself called as a witness admissible? (British Columbia, Canada)
Can a lawyer who fails to put a proposition of evidence to a witness in cross-examination in a civil matter be held liable to sue the witness in a criminal case? (British Columbia, Canada)
If there is a contradiction between two statements made by the same witness at different times, can that contradiction affect the credibility of the witness? (British Columbia, Canada)
Does the principle against self-incrimination apply to a witness in a criminal case? (British Columbia, Canada)
What is the test for producing documents containing confidential and commercially confidential information? (British Columbia, Canada)
Can a court order that a party provide an affidavit verifying its list of documents when in the absence of any adequate explanation, relevant documents have been omitted from the list? (British Columbia, Canada)
Is it necessary for counsel to describe documents in a way that would allow the other side to view the documents in the same way? (British Columbia, Canada)
