Civil Resolution Tribunal – A Self-Represented Litigant’s View of the CRT

Civil Resolution Tribunal – A Self-Represented Litigant’s View of the CRT

NSRLP Advisory Board Member and former SRL Jennifer Muller shares her thoughts on the British Columbia CRT model, from the perspective of a self-represented litigant.

Share this post

Comment (1)

  • sandra olson

    I sent a request for information to the civil resolution tribunal. Shannon salter replied. I asked how they could be incorporating dna testing into any area of the law without it following the actual rules of evidence. ie,,, the body must be regulated, must be standardized. and must have a known and proven error rate. as well, it is well known that there is no defense unless you have the benefit of examination of evidence by discovery. and a proper defense. is also impossible without full disclosure of evidence. she replied yesterday with a very vaguely worded response that basically stated that they do not use dna unless they are certain it is reliable.. I asked what she means by that… all dna is unregulated, unstandardized and there is no reporting or investigating of error, and no clinical trials to proven error rates.. this is the same for ALL dna. there is not some that is and some not. she is refusing to answer. and in my case, no discovery of evidence was allowed by the court, and no full disclosure of the file is permitted. they are hiding behind first the health act, then when it was proven they don’t fall under this,, they hid behind the privacy act. the privacy commission allowed this bunk. they claimed they don’t have to respect the rules of court. they are separate. I need a lawyer.. one that is not going to be intimidated by the law. if you know of someone willing to be of assistance, please contact me directly.

    January 23, 2015 at 5:45 pm

Comments are closed.

Font Resize
Background Color