Lecoupe v. Canada ( Chief of Defence Staff )
T-1650-93
Nadon J.
29/4/94
11 pp.
Application under R. 332(1) for order striking out certain paragraphs of respondent's affidavit as irrelevant, hearsay and opinion evidence -- Argued respondent's affidavit not made on interlocutory motion and should be limited to facts within personal knowledge -- Éthier v. Canada (RCMP Commissioner), [1993] 2 F.C. 659 (C.A.) can be reconciled with R. 332(1) if Rule read as being subject to common law exceptions to hearsay rule (reliability and necessity); admission of proposed reliable and necessary evidence, with appropriate weight to be given to such evidence to be determined by trial judge -- Whether evidence sought to be introduced by respondent reliable and necessary -- Traditional approach of presumptive rule of exclusion of hearsay unless evidence in question could fit into one of "set of ossified judicially created categories" replaced by approach permitting admission where necessity for such evidence shown and where sufficient circumstantial guarantees of trustworthiness existing -- Two paragraphs shall be struck: clearly hearsay evidence -- Federal Court Rules, C.R.C., c. 663, R. 332(1).