Online Practice Manuals

Emil Anderson Construction Co. Ltd. v. British Columbia Railway Co. (No. 2)

• 1987 CanLII 2583 (BC SC)
  • Go to CanLII for full text

The above case is referenced within:

1. Expert Evidence in British Columbia Civil Proceedings (Current to: June 01 2025)
   • Chapter 2. What Is an Expert?
     • III. Limits on Expert Testimony [§2.8]
       • C. An Expert May Not Interpret Contracts [§2.11]
     • IV. The Ultimate Issue Rule [§2.17]
       • A. Avoiding Usurpation of the Court’s Function [§2.18]
   • Chapter 4. Expert Opinions and Ethical and Professional Responsibility Issues
     • III. Specific Ethical and Professional Responsibility Issues [§4.5]
       • A. Expert, Not Advocate, for Any Party [§4.6]
   • Chapter 6. Preparation of the Written Expert Opinion and Disclosure Pre-Trial
     • I. Written Reports of Expert Opinion [§6.1]
       • C. Content of the Expert Report [§6.4]
         • 3. Facts and Assumptions in the Expert Report [§6.7]
   • Chapter 8. Attacking Expert Evidence
     • III. Challenging the Expert’s Qualifications [§8.7]
       • E. Scope of Expertise [§8.12]
         • 1. Required Expertise to Opine on Issues in the Case [§8.13]
     • VI. Challenging Expert Evidence through Other Avenues of Attack [§8.20]
       • A. Challenging Facts on Which the Opinion Is Based [§8.21]
         • 1. Expert’s Inferences [§8.22]
           • a. Facts on Which the Opinion Is Based [§8.23]
           • b. Factual Inferences [§8.24]
       • H. Challenging the Expert Opinion as Argument Disguised as Evidence [§8.38]
       • J. Challenging Reliance on Experts’ Own Observations [§8.40]
       • L. Challenging the Opinion as Making Conclusions of Law [§8.42]
     • VII. The Court’s Response to the Expert Opinion [§8.44]
       • B. Inadmissible Content in the Opinion [§8.46]
         • 2. Mixed Admissible and Inadmissible Opinion [§8.48]
         • 3. Doubt Regarding Objectionable Aspects [§8.49]