Reasons for judgement were released this week by the BC Supreme Court, Victoria Registry, dealing with document production requests in an ICBC Claim.
In this week’s case (Polianskaia v. Melanson) the Plaintiff was a passenger in a vehicle driven by her mother. She was involved in a crash with the Defendants vehicle which apparently “failed to yield the right of way to the Plaintiff’s vehicle“. The Plaintiff was injured and sued for damages.
Following the collision the Plaintiff’s mother (who was not a defendant in the lawsuit) “signed a written statement prepared by a representative of ICBC“. The Defendant did not disclose this document in their list of documents. The Plaintiff brought an application to compel production. The Court granted this application and provided the following reasons:
 This second aspect of the plaintiff’s application is more straightforward.
 There is no evidence before the court which suggests that ICBC might have a statement from the plaintiff herself. The evidence addresses only the possible existence of statements made to ICBC by each of the plaintiff’s parents.
 The plaintiff’s mother deposes to having signed a written statement prepared by a representative of ICBC. Through defence counsel’s correspondence, the existence of such a statement is denied. The correspondence is not sworn evidence of either indirect or direct knowledge of the existence of this statement. In those circumstances, the court has no reliable evidence to weigh against the contrary evidence of the plaintiff’s mother. In the absence of such evidence, the order will go that ICBC is to produce to the plaintiff any written statement in its possession or control signed by Elvira Polianskaia.