Canada: Enforcing Letters Rogatory in British Columbia – an Update

In February 1995 Washington State Bar News published Enforcing Letters Rogatory in British Columbia, highlighting practical points involved in obtaining an order from the Supreme Court of British Columbia enforcing letters rogatory issued by the American federal or state courts. This is an update to that article, highlighting developments in the intervening period.

The most important development is one of substantive law. The making of an order enforcing letters rogatory remains a matter within the discretion of the Supreme Court (British Columbia’s trial court). However, the basis on which the Court will exercise that discretion has changed. Previously the Court had generally refused to enforce letters rogatory unless their principal purpose was to obtain evidence for use at trial, rather than as part of a discovery process. While the purpose of the letters rogatory remains a factor in the exercise of the Court’s discretion, it is no longer determinative. The key issue now is the impact the proposed examination will have on the British Columbia witness, and whether the imposition and inconvenience of being required to testify in a foreign proceeding compromises Canadian sovereignty by placing an undue burden on them (Campbell Estate v. Stenhouse, [1995] B.C.J. No. 2304; GST Telecommunications Inc. v. Provenzano [2000] B.C.J. No. 378).

The extent of the burden on the witness is often measured by comparing it to what would be required of them if the litigation were in the Supreme Court of British Columbia, rather than a foreign court. Under the British Columbia Rules of Court, a non-party witness who refuses to be interviewed or to answer written questions can be ordered to be examined under oath. In most circumstances, examination under letters rogatory is not an undue burden in comparison to that.

Provenzano provides an example of circumstances which did amount to an undue burden. The letter rogatory named British Columbia counsel for the party obtaining the letter rogatory as the "commissioner" before whom the examination was to be conducted. The letter rogatory did not limit questioning of the witness to issues relevant to the American action of which the witness was said to have knowledge. It made an extremely broad request for production of documents. It did not recognize that the witness’s evidence might be subject to solicitor-client privilege or confidentiality (the witness was a lawyer for one of the parties in the American action). The evidence sought could have exposed the witness to liability.

Provenzano is also noteworthy because, despite the unduly burdensome nature of the letter rogatory, the Court addressed that burden by placing limiting conditions on the enforcement of the letter rogatory, in effect restricting its request for assistance, rather than simply refusing to enforce it, as had been the previous practice.

Recent cases also raise a number of practical and procedural points. In United States Securities and Exchange Commission v. Ono (2001), 94 B.C.L.R. (3d) 385, the Supreme Court reiterated that not only the proposed witness, but the other parties in the American action, should be named as respondents to the petition seeking to enforce the letter rogatory and should be served with that petition and its supporting affidavits. In Ono this was not done. However, in another example of the Court’s recent willingness to remedy deficiencies in letters rogatory rather than refusing to enforce them, the Court ordered that the letter rogatory be enforced, but required the enforcing order to be served on the other American parties and gave them ten days from service to apply to vary it.

A practical consequence of naming the other parties to the American action as respondents is that under the Rules of Court residents of the United States have 28 days from service of the petition to file an appearance in the proceeding. The petition cannot be heard until those 28 days have passed. If the other parties do appear and take a position, there will be further delay while materials for the hearing are exchanged.

Where there is no dispute between the American parties that the proposed witness should be examined, it is often possible to persuade the other parties to waive their 28 days to appear and advise that they do not intend to file an appearance. Armed with evidence of that, it is possible to have the petition heard within the 28 days.

Otherwise, it generally takes about seven weeks from service to hearing of the petition. That can cause problems with discovery cut-offs in the American litigation. Counsel should give themselves plenty of lead time to have their letters rogatory enforced in British Columbia.

Letters rogatory generally require that the witness be examined before a "commissioner", who functions as a sort of referee, to ensure that the examination takes place as ordered. Where the examination is not expected to be contentious, there is no real need for a commissioner. It is then generally my practice to have the court reporter for the examination serve formally in that capacity. However, where there are likely to be issues between the American parties or between the witness and the parties, it is wise to have an experienced British Columbia litigation lawyer serve as commissioner. In Ono a master of the Supreme Court was appointed commissioner. Counsel should bear in mind that where a lawyer serves as commissioner they will charge their usual hourly rate for doing so.

The Supreme Court has made it clear that examinations of witnesses under letters rogatory are to be conducted according to the procedural and evidentiary rules of both British Columbia and the American jurisdiction, with those of British Columbia to prevail in the event of a conflict. Under British Columbia rules the party which obtained the letter rogatory calls the witness. That party must examine the witness in chief and may not, ordinarily, cross examine them. It has been my practice to recommend that letters rogatory be obtained expressly permitting counsel to examine the witness in accordance with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, which I understand give the party obtaining the letter rogatory the right to cross examine. Many orders enforcing such letters rogatory have been granted, but not to my knowledge in a contested case. I expect that if a petition seeking such an order were to be contested by the witness or the other parties, that term would be refused.

Notwithstanding that British Columbia procedural and evidentiary rules govern, the relevance of the questions on the examination is to be determined under American law. This is only common sense, as the examination is to be evidence in an American action. In Ono, the order enforcing the letters rogatory provided for the referral of questions of relevance to the American court for resolution.

The Supreme Court will likely limit questioning of the witness, and their obligation to disclose documents, to specific issues in the American action about which they have been shown to have knowledge.

The Court will also likely limit the documents the witness is required to disclose at the examination to those held in their personal capacity, as distinct from as corporate officer or counsel. Documents held in those capacities would have to be obtained from the corporation or client. It is generally possible to negotiate the disclosure of such documents in advance of the examination, in the interest of making the process more cost efficient for all concerned.

In Provenzano the Court suggested that the witness (who was a lawyer) would not be required to disclose documents which were confidential or the subject of solicitor-client privilege. Presumably they would not be required to answer questions of that nature either. And presumably the rationale was that these documents and issues could be canvassed with the client.

At least where the documents on which the witness may be examined are numerous, the Court has required the party examining the witness to disclose in advance of the examination the particular issues and documents they intend to put to the witnesses.

British Columbia law requires that parties obtaining evidence through the discovery process use it only for the purposes of the action in which it was obtained, unless they have the consent of the party from whom they obtained the evidence, or a court order, permitting them to do otherwise. In Ono the Court made it a condition of the order enforcing the letter rogatory that the parties’ use of the evidence obtained in the examination be similarly restricted, and required counsel for the parties to provide written undertakings to that effect.

The issue of compensation for the witness is difficult. Under the British Columbia Rules of Court a witness is only entitled to Cdn$20 per day of examination. However, he is also entitled to "a reasonable sum" for necessary preparation to give evidence. That amount is entirely in the discretion of the Court. At least where the witnesses are lawyers and the issues are complex, the Court has been willing to allow significant amounts for preparation, although not normal lawyer’s fees.

The Court has also been willing to allow the witness to be represented by counsel at the examination, where the issues warrant it. However, the Court has been clear that such counsel have no general right to participate in the examination. They may only advise the witness about issues such as solicitor-client privilege and confidentiality. The Court has not expressly required the examining party to pay for the witness’s counsel.

While these procedural and practical issues may make the prospect of enforcing letters rogatory in British Columbia seem daunting, counsel should remember that they arise in complex, contested cases, often where the proposed witness is the British Columbia lawyer for one of the American parties. In a more routine case, where the witness is simply a lay person who was somehow involved in the events giving rise to the American action, few of these issues are contentious. In such cases the details of the examination are usually negotiated among the American parties and the witness, and if the petition seeking enforcement of the letter rogatory is actually heard at all, it is unopposed.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

In association with
Related Topics
Related Articles
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
Email Address
Company Name
Confirm Password
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Media & IT
 Real Estate
 Wealth Mgt
Asia Pacific
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
United States
Worldwide Updates
Registration (you must scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of

To Use you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.


The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.


Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions