[Why Lexoral]

The record is the evidence.
Not a version of it.

Two languages, two different things in the file. One is testimony; the other is a rendering of it. What the law asks for, and what we deliver.

Under a section 530 order the law does not ask for a readable English document. Most firms deliver one anyway. This is what it asks for:

Criminal Code · s. 530.1(g)

“the record of proceedings during the preliminary inquiry or trial shall include (i) a transcript of everything that was said during those proceedings in the official language in which it was said, (ii) a transcript of any interpretation into the other official language of what was said, and (iii) any documentary evidence that was tendered during those proceedings in the official language in which it was tendered”

R.S.C. 1985, c. C-46 · laws-lois.justice.gc.ca

(i)What was said, in the language it was said: we transcribe it as spoken.
(ii)The interpretation, in a separate transcript, marked for what it is.
(iii)The exhibits, in the language they were tendered.
One answer, three stages
Spoken Interpreted In the record Usual practice FR EN EN The French is never written down. Lexoral FR EN FR + EN Both, each marked for what it is. s. 530.1(g)
01

A jurist transcribes the French

Not a language vendor with a glossary. Where a translation is disputed the court weighs who made it. The practitioner on your file has argued in French before Quebec’s National Assembly and written constitutional-law texts in both languages.

02

One sitting, two procedural frameworks

Quebec conventions and U.S. deposition practice from the same audio, in one pass. In Quebec both languages are already the record; in a U.S. matter the interpretation stays where the forum wants it, and what was said stays underneath.

03

A signature you can telephone

Two named practitioners. No contractor pool, no offshore desk, no model output passed off as reviewed. Whoever signs the accuracy declaration answers the phone.

See how a transcript is built
[One matter, two forms]

The same proceeding, headed for a U.S. federal court and for the Superior Court of Québec. Both conventions, from one sitting.

One matter, two formsSpecimen · fictional parties
U.S. · federal caption
United States District CourtDistrict of Oregon

MARIE TREMBLAY,

 

Plaintiff,

 

v.

 

NORTHGATE LOGISTICS INC.,

 

Defendant.

No. 3:26-cv-00412

 

DEPOSITION OF

MARIE TREMBLAY

 

Taken in French

and in English

 

 

 

Québec · Superior Court heading
CanadaProvince de QuébecDistrict de Montréal
Cour supérieure(Chambre civile)
N° 500-17-000000-260
MARIE TREMBLAYDemanderessec.NORTHGATE LOGISTICS INC.Défenderesse
[Produced redacted]

What has to come out comes out line by line, with the ground given in the margin.

Specimen · Tremblay v. Northgate — vol. I, p. 108Produced redacted · unredacted copy withheld
108Q. Who signed the carrier release on ?Redacted — personal information109  110A. , le directeur du terminal.Redacted — personal information111 (Interpretation: , the terminal manager.) 112  113Q. And the instruction came from ?Redacted — privileged114  115A. Redacted — privileged116  117  118Q. Thank you. Nothing further on that line. 
What has to come out comes out line by line, with the ground given in the margin. The unredacted copy does not leave the file.
[Next]

A recording or a proceeding in French, English or both? Send us the proceeding, the languages and the deadline.

Submit a proceeding →