Not exact matches
As a consequence, First Canadian Title voluntarily suspended the practice of
witnessing documents
via interactive
videoconferencing in 2000 pending the outcome its petition.
On March 2, 2000, at the request of First Canadian Title, the Ethics Committee met to consider whether a lawyer in BC could properly
witness a document
via live interactive
videoconferencing.
Advances have been made in the quality of communication
via videoconferencing, which has all but eliminated the problems often associated with
videoconferencing in the early days of its use, which involved time delays in the transmission and which in turn frequently resulted in counsel and
witnesses talking over each other and which made for a less than satisfactory method of conducting both direct or cross examination.
On the other hand, the plaintiff can not, alone, determine which
witnesses are «important» and therefore should attend in person, and which
witnesses are «not so important» and therefore should be permitted to testify
via videoconferencing.