What are the risks of cross-examining a witness myself as a self-represented litigant in Ontario?

Cross-examination is a skill that takes real preparation and judgment, and doing it without experience carries genuine risks for a self-represented litigant. A poorly conducted cross-examination can waste valuable court time asking questions that don't actually challenge the witness's evidence, can allow a witness to simply repeat and reinforce their story instead of being tested on it, or can accidentally open the door to unhelpful evidence that wouldn't otherwise have come in. There's also an emotional dimension: cross-examining someone directly involved in a dispute, sometimes an opposing party or a person you know personally, can be genuinely difficult to do effectively while managing your own composure in front of a judge.

Careful preparation helps meaningfully: identifying in advance exactly what points need to be challenged or established, preparing specific questions rather than a general topic list, and knowing when to stop rather than continuing past the point a witness has already conceded something useful. Reviewing the other side's documents and prior statements closely before the hearing, so questions are grounded in specifics rather than generalities, tends to produce a much more effective cross-examination. Given how much a poorly run cross-examination can hurt a case, at least getting advice on strategy from a lawyer beforehand is often worthwhile, even if you plan to conduct it yourself.