It is possible for evidence to be taken by videoconference in the Supreme Court of Gibraltar either with the participation of a court in another Member State or directly by a court of that Member State. The procedures for obtaining evidence are found in Part 32 of the Civil Procedure Rules of England and Wales which apply to Gibraltar. Rule 32.3 states that a court may allow a witness to give evidence through a video link or by other means. Further information can be found in Practice Direction 32, Annex 3.
There are no restrictions of the kind suggested on the type of person who can be examined when requests are made under either Articles 10 to 12 or 17. Provided that the request falls properly within the scope of Regulation 1206/2001 and is compatible with the law of Gibraltar any relevant person can be examined.
Provided that the request for evidence complies with the law of Gibraltar and it is practicable to obtain the evidence via videoconference there are no restrictions on the type of evidence that can be obtained.
When a request is made under Articles 10 to 12 it is usual, but not compulsory, for the examination to take place in a court. A videoconference for a request made under Article 17 can be held anywhere.
At present there is no facility to record videoconference hearings in the Supreme Court of Gibraltar. If a recording is required the parties to the claim must arrange for a recording to be made either at the point at which the evidence is given or the point at which it is viewed.
a) Where requests are made under Articles 10 to 12 the hearing should be conducted in English.
b) There is no language requirement for hearings where there is direct taking of evidence although the requesting Member State must provide interpretation for witnesses who do not understand the language in which the hearing is to be conducted.
Where a request is made under Articles 10 to 12 and the witness requires an interpreter to understand English the interpreter is to be provided by the parties. If the witness does not require interpretation but the requesting court cannot understand English it is the responsibility of that court to provide for its own interpretation. The location of an interpreter in such circumstances is not subject to any restrictions although for practical reasons it would probably be easier for the interpreter to be at the requesting court.
The requesting court is responsible for providing interpretation for requests made under Article 17. Again there are no restrictions on where the interpreter should be located.
Where a request is made under Articles 10 to 12 all arrangements will be made by the requested court. Under Article 17, where the Central Body for Gibraltar has authorised direct taking of evidence it shall notify the requesting court of the arrangements. It is then the responsibility of the requesting court to liaise to make the necessary arrangements.
The requesting court should liaise with the person to be examined to find a mutually available time. It is sensible to allow at least a month to make the necessary arrangements.
Costs will vary depending on a number of circumstances including the place of the videoconference (i.e. whether it is in court or another premises); the time of the hearing (i.e. if it is out of normal court hours staff will be required to stay longer); whether any special procedures are required; and whether any costs arise through the use of the equipment. The Gibraltar Courts Service will inform the requesting court of the costs. Payment should be made in UK Pounds either by cash or card if paid in person at the Supreme Court Registry or electronically.
Where a request for direct taking of evidence under Article 17 is granted by the Central Body the order which is given will stipulate that the requesting court must inform the person being examined that his/her attendance at a hearing is voluntary and that he/she is entitled to leave the hearing at any point in the proceedings. The requesting court is asked to send a copy of this order to the person being examined when arrangements for the videoconference are being made.
Where a person is examined by the Supreme Court of Gibraltar with the participation of a requesting court under Articles 10 to 12 that person will be required to take an oath or make an affirmation as part of which he/she must confirm his/her identity. Where a requesting court takes evidence directly under Article 17 it will be for that court to use whatever means it considers necessary to verify the identity of the person being examined.
Where a request is made under Articles 10 to 12 the oath or affirmation will be made under the normal procedures for courts in Gibraltar. Where a request is made under Article 17 the requesting court should notify the requested court of the requirements for any oath so that appropriate books are provided.
Where a request is made under Articles 10 to 12 the requested court will make the necessary arrangements. Where the Central Body authorises a request under Article 17 it will inform the Supreme Court to expect contact from the requesting court and that it should cooperate with the requesting court to ensure there is someone available to operate the videoconferencing facilities and deal with any technical problems at the time of the hearing.
Where requests are made under Article 17 the requesting court should notify the requested court if the person being examined has any special requirements – e.g. wheelchair access or a loop system where a hearing aid is used.
The national language version of this page is maintained by the respective EJN contact point. The translations have been done by the European Commission service. Possible changes introduced in the original by the competent national authority may not be yet reflected in the translations. Neither the EJN nor the European Commission accept responsibility or liability whatsoever with regard to any information or data contained or referred to in this document. Please refer to the legal notice to see copyright rules for the Member State responsible for this page.