england-and-wales court rules-of-court cross-examination
Can counterpart&#39;s counsel be cross-examined on the validity/merit of their arguments, or only witnesses?
<p>In court, a legal representative may be conducting the case and calling witnesses and cross examining the other side's witnesses.</p>
<ol>
<li><p>Are these representatives &quot;sworn in&quot; under oath?</p>
</li>
<li><p>As they may also deliver submissions of legal arguments, if not, perhaps, statements of fact, can they also be cross-examined by the counterparty?</p>
</li>
</ol>

<p>In the <a href="/questions/tagged/united-states" class="post-tag" title="show questions tagged &#39;united-states&#39;" aria-label="show questions tagged &#39;united-states&#39;" rel="tag" aria-labelledby="tag-united-states-tooltip-container">united-states</a>, attorneys are almost never placed under oath. Their statements -- whether they are assertions of fact or legal arguments -- are not evidence, and they are not subject to cross examination.</p>
<p>There are limited circumstances in which an attorney would be competent to present actual evidence. In such cases, the attorney would be sworn in as a witness and subject to cross examination, but the attorney would likely also be disqualified from acting as an attorney in such a situation under <a href="https://www.americanbar.org/groups/professional_responsibility/publications/model_rules_of_professional_conduct/rule_3_7_lawyer_as_witness/" rel="noreferrer">Model Rule 3.7</a>.</p>

<p>Only witnesses are cross-examined. See various rules of procedure: e.g. <a href="https://www.ontariocourts.ca/scj/practice/rules-forms/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Ontario</a>, <a href="https://www.bclaws.gov.bc.ca/civix/document/id/complete/statreg/168_2009_00" rel="nofollow noreferrer">British Columbia</a>.</p>
<p>The procedure for responding to counsel submissions of their legal arguments is to make submissions in reply. These would be done at opening and closing.</p>

<h2>Counsel do not give evidence</h2>
<p>As such, they are not subject to the rules of evidence including cross-examination.</p>
<p>When they argue to law they are making submissions, not giving evidence. In general, a wise judge asks them to make their submissions to each other before submitting them - most sensible attorneys actually agree on 99% of what the law is if they listen to each others points.</p>
