Examiner Information What is a Special Examiner? "A Special Examiner is an official examiner."1 "An Official Examiner is an officer of a court who presides over examinations for discovery, cross-examinations on affidavits and other examinations."2 "Whenever an official court reporter attends on and takes down in shorthand any oral examination under oath held pursuant to a Rule it is not necessary for the examiner, commissioner, clerk or deputy clerk, as the case may be, to be present at the examination, and an official court reporter so attending in the absence of the examiner, commissioner, clerk or deputy clerk, as the case may be, has power to perform the duties of the examiner, commissioner, clerk or deputy clerk, and in particular but not so as to restrict the generality of the foregoing has power to administer oaths, to take affidavits, to receive affirmations and to mark exhibits."3 Duties of a Special Examiner "An examination for discovery is for the purpose of obtaining a full disclosure of the facts upon which a party to the action relies, and also for the purpose of preventing the examining party from being taken by surprise at the trial.  The Special Examiner must so conduct the examination as to enable the examining party to obtain from the opposing party the facts on which he relies either in support of his claim if a plaintiff, or in defence of the plaintiff's claim if it is the defendant who is being examined.  The Special Examiner has a discretion as to what person, if any, may be present during the examinations.4  He has full power to regulate the examination in regard to allowing a shorthand writer to be present, or in admitting the public as he pleases.5  The Examiner's office is not a public court and he has a discretion, which may be reviewed by the Court, as to the admission or exclusion of persons who desire to be present at an examination.6  He may either admit or exclude persons according to the circumstances of the case and to what he considers will secure the ends of justice.7"8 "The appointment is issued either by an examiner (in Edmonton or Calgary), or the clerk of the court (in other judicial districts).  Examiners are usually the heads of private court reporting firms.  In practice, the clerk never attends, and the examiner rarely does.  Usually only a court reporter attends, swears the witnesses, takes verbatim shorthand notes, and marks the exhibits.  Outside Edmonton or Calgary the examination may take place at the court-house, but otherwise it is usually in the office of one of the lawyers.  Disputes about whether a question is proper, or other procedure, are usually settled later, after the transcripts have been delivered, by a motion under R. 213.  It is now uncommon to interrupt the discovery to ask the clerk or examiner for a ruling, or to attend upon a judge or master in chambers."9 "The Rules may contemplate supervision of the examination for discovery by the examiner, be it the head of the court reporting firm or the clerk of the court.  But in practice, that is never done (except maybe for a ruling on who can attend the discoveries).  In practice, the lawyers take any dispute over the propriety of a question or an answer to a master (or maybe a judge).  Usually the party questioning waits until the transcripts are available some weeks later and then issues a notice of motion to compel answers.  Occasionally they will still adjourn the discovery and attend on a master or judge."10 "The obtaining of an interpreter by the Special Examiner would appear to be the logical and most convenient procedure to follow, subject however to the parties' being allowed to substitute a person selected by them, or to the Examiner's allowing any other person to act where that was in accord with the proper administration of justice.  The Special Examiner is an officer of the Court and an examination is under his supervision and control.  It is his duty to make any ruling necessary as to who should be used as an interpreter.11  It has also been held that it is the duty of a party not familiar with the English language to supply the interpreter.12"13 "The Special Examiner as an officer of the Court is given wide powers and is competent to determine whether a proposed examinee for discovery understands the nature of an oath, even if he be a child of tender years.14"15 "The Nova Scotia Rules permit the Examiner to stop the examination or to limit its scope if the examination is being conducted in bad faith, or in an unreasonable manner, or for other good cause."16 What is needed to make an application? An application to become a Special Examiner is made before a Justice of the Court of Queen's Bench in a chambers' application pursuant to Section 203(3)(c) and 204(1) of the Alberta Rules of Court.  In preparation, the applicant must swear an Affidavit stating the reasons why a Special Examiner's license is being sought (i.e.; they are a court reporter who reports civil proceedings).  It would be beneficial for the applicant to briefly state their educational qualifications, prior employment history, and membership in any professional associations. The applicant should also prepare the form of Order. A laywer is generally retained by the applicant to appear before the Justice to make the application. Who may become a Special Examiner? There are no requirements prescribed by law which would restrict a court reporter making an application to become a Special Examiner.  If a court reporter is taking civil examinations, they must be conducted through the authority of a Special Examiner, either their own appointment or the appointment of the principal of the firm for which they are working. Sample Affidavit Sample Order Relevant provisions of the Alberta Rules of Court ______________________________________________ 1.  D. Dukelow, B. Nuse, The Dictionary of Canadian Law, 1991, (Toronto, Ont.:  The Carswell Company Limited, 1991) p. 1010. 2.  Ibid., p. 715. 3.  Alberta Rules of Court. 4.  Mowers v. Mowers [1952] O.W.N. 831. 5.  Sivewright v. Sivewright (1879) 8 P.R. 81 (Can.). 6.  Re  Western of Can. Oil Lands & Public Works Co. (1877) 6 Ch. D. 109; Hands v. Upper Can. Furniture Co. (1895) 12 P.R. 292. 7.  Merchants Bank v. Ketchum (1895) 16 P.R. 366. 8.  Clare E. Choate, Discovery in Canada, (Toronto, Ont.:  The Carswell Company Limited, 1977) p. 57. 9.  W.A. Stevenson and J.E. Cote, Alberta Civil Procedure Handbook, (Edmonton, Alta.). 10.  Ibid. 11.  Buccella v. Morgan [1959] O.W.N. 351. 12.  Facchini v. Oakley [1960] O.W.N. 299. 13.  Choate, Discovery in Canada, pp. 60-61. 14.  Klassen v. Saskosky (1952) 5 W.W.R. 315 (Man.). 15.  Choate, Discovery in Canada, p. 162. 16.  Ibid., p. 142.