![plaintiff didn plaintiff didn](https://cdn.uslegal.com/uslegal-preview/VA/VA-021-D/1.png)
In my respectful opinion the plaintiff is not entitled to ascertain the evidentiary basis of the defendant’s case by way of this demand for particulars. In my view the concern raised by the plaintiff at this stage is that he does not know but would like to know now what precise evidence the defendant may lead in support of his allegations of fact. No. 2660 (S.C.)(QL), where Master Joyce said at paragraph 11: Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada et al, 2004 BCSC 1306, Mr. Justice Cohen considered the distinction between the material facts and evidence and referred to an earlier decision of Mr. Justice Joyce when he was a master of this court, Firestone v. The pleading party is not required to, and indeed, is not entitled to set out in the pleadings the evidence that he or she intends to adduce at trial to prove the facts that have been pleaded. How that party intends to prove the material facts and particulars is a matter of evidence. Particulars are provided to disclose what the pleader intends to prove. In that case, His Lordship makes the point that: et al, 2005 BCSC 371, beginning at paragraph 9. The entitlement of a party to particulars…is discussed by Mr. Justice Joyce in Delaney & Friends Cartoon Productions Ltd. Justice Hinkson agreed with the Plaintiff and in dismissing the Defence motion made the following useful comments about the limited use requests for particulars should have in ICBC injury claims: The Plaintiff refused arguing that this was an inappropriate request. ICBC’s lawyer demanded that the Plaintiff provide particulars of these claims. He sued for damages seeking compensation for, amongst other things, past and future wage loss, past and future medical expenses, past and future disability and out of pocket expenses.
![plaintiff didn plaintiff didn](https://www.signnow.com/preview/497/308/497308878/large.png)
Phillips) the Plaintiff was injured in a motor vehicle collision. There are, however, limits to the use of this Rule and this was demonstrated in reasons for judgement released this week by the BC Supreme Court. If a party to a lawsuit is not clear what the other side is formally putting in issue they can ask for clarification by making a demand for particulars under Rule 3-7(23) of the Rules of Court. One further tool is the request for “ particulars“. From requiring the exchange of relevant documents, permitting the parties to attend an examination for discovery and even forcing an ‘ independent medical exam’ in certain circumstances there are many tools which can be used to learn about your opponents case. When suing for compensation in an ICBC claim the BC Supreme Court Rules contain various ways to force disclosure of information.