Federal Court - Christian Aboriginal Infrastructure Developments ...

Federal Court - Christian Aboriginal Infrastructure Developments ... Federal Court - Christian Aboriginal Infrastructure Developments ...

22.01.2015 Views

Page: 376 [1406] These internal contradictions undermine the reliability of Mr. Ivanski’s evidence. [1407] Mr. Sewell, RDG in the Whitehorse office from December 1997 to December 2001, was also cross-examined about P-38 when he was called as a witness for the Defendant. The following evidence appears at pages 4218 to 4222 as follows: Q. Now sir, in the course of your evidence that you gave in responding to questions asked of you by Mr. Whittle, you were asked some questions in relation to the Sterling Wood Report. Do you remember that 2010 FC 495 (CanLII) A. I do remember that. Q. And as I understand it, sir, the first time that you personally became familiar with the existence of such a document or report was in the course of litigation and in the course of examinations for discovery, is that true A. That’s my recollection, yes. Q. If I were to suggest to you that that likely took place well after your own examination for discovery but during the course of Mr. Kerr’s discovery, would that also be consistent with your memory A. I’m not sure exactly during the period of discovery when I first encountered that document. Q. Let’s see if I can assist you in this respect. And Mr. Whittle will undoubtedly have a better memory of this than do, I but this is designed to refresh your memory on the issue, sir. In a discovery, which took place in February of ’03, Mr. Alan Kerr, the deponent for the plaintiffs, made reference to the Sterling Wood report and then was asked to produce that report. The plaintiffs were unable to do so, and then some years later in January of 2007, Mr. Kerr was further examined by Mr. Whittle, at which time Mr. Whittle brought a copy of the report or reports to the discovery process.

Page: 377 Now does that generally accord with your memory A. Yes it does, sir. Q. Now, what I want to do is determine which document you are referring to, whether or not it’s the March draft or the August report. And I would ask that the witness be shown defendant’s white volume tab 3, as well as exhibit P-28 - - P-38, I’m sorry. Now sir you’ve got before you defendant’s white binder volume 1, tab 3. That should be some documentation bearing a date of June 1 st , 1991 from Sterling Wood Group. Do you see that 2010 FC 495 (CanLII) A. I have that at tab 3 of volume 1 of the white binders, yes. Q. And there are lots of handwritten notations on that material, you are aware of that A. I see that, yes. Q. And then, sir, you see Exhibit P-38, which is the documentation dated August, 1991. Do you see that A. I see that, yes. Q. Now, Exhibit P-38 did not surface in this trial until I crossexamined Mr. Monty. Do you remember that A. I don’t recall that, no. Q. Now sir, which of the two documents which are before you, did you come to be aware of late in the discovery process Or did you come to be aware of both during the discovery process A. I don’t recall ever seeing the one - - I don’t recall the one with the June 3 rd memo on top of it. I recall seeing it as a stand alone document, perhaps more resembling the August of ’91 version. Q. Do you recall seeing P-38 during the course of the examination for discovery process late 2006, early 2007 A. I believe so, yes sir.

Page: 377<br />

Now does that generally accord with your memory<br />

A. Yes it does, sir.<br />

Q. Now, what I want to do is determine which document you are<br />

referring to, whether or not it’s the March draft or the August report.<br />

And I would ask that the witness be shown defendant’s white volume<br />

tab 3, as well as exhibit P-28 - - P-38, I’m sorry.<br />

Now sir you’ve got before you defendant’s white binder volume 1,<br />

tab 3. That should be some documentation bearing a date of June 1 st ,<br />

1991 from Sterling Wood Group. Do you see that<br />

2010 FC 495 (CanLII)<br />

A. I have that at tab 3 of volume 1 of the white binders, yes.<br />

Q. And there are lots of handwritten notations on that material,<br />

you are aware of that<br />

A. I see that, yes.<br />

Q. And then, sir, you see Exhibit P-38, which is the<br />

documentation dated August, 1991. Do you see that<br />

A. I see that, yes.<br />

Q. Now, Exhibit P-38 did not surface in this trial until I crossexamined<br />

Mr. Monty. Do you remember that<br />

A. I don’t recall that, no.<br />

Q. Now sir, which of the two documents which are before you,<br />

did you come to be aware of late in the discovery process Or did<br />

you come to be aware of both during the discovery process<br />

A. I don’t recall ever seeing the one - - I don’t recall the one<br />

with the June 3 rd memo on top of it. I recall seeing it as a stand alone<br />

document, perhaps more resembling the August of ’91 version.<br />

Q. Do you recall seeing P-38 during the course of the<br />

examination for discovery process late 2006, early 2007<br />

A. I believe so, yes sir.

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!