4 KudoZ points awarded for this answer. Comment: "Thanks so much for your response and your thoughts on the matter. If I remember correctly my worry with the Canadian term was that the testimony generally was not directly admissable at a subsequent trial (I may be wrong there). There were also issues regarding the common law practice of placing witness under oath/affirmation in out-of-court proceedings compared to what discovery material would be admissable if 'only' a truth admonition was administered - which can only be administered in court by a judge - in the Scandinavian legal system. The sanctions would potentially be different. Maybe I am making a mountain out of the proverbial molehill here - but it strikes me that one should be able to distinguish between the terms also in translation. I'll go with "deposition" I think and then probably footnote it - which won't be pretty. But, again, thanks - and I'll give you the points for effort. Best, Christian www.tollund.com "