Skip to content

New year ushers in changes to civil justice system

|Written By Tim Shufelt

In navigating a new civil litigation regime, lawyers in Ontario will have to change the way they prepare for court, says a Mississauga commercial litigator.

Attorney General Chris Bentley vows the reforms will improve access to justice.

The new year brings with it major reforms to the province’s civil justice system, including an expansion of the mandate for simplified procedure and limitations on discovery.

“Hopefully, this will make lawyers turn their heads to these things before the 11th hour,” says Sophie Petrillo, a lawyer with Pallett Valo LLP.

“It forces lawyers to do their homework in advance. We’ve all sat in court while lawyers went through documents one by one. And clients can’t afford that.”

The long-awaited amendments, which also raise the monetary limit for Small Claims Court, follow a set of recommendations that former Ontario associate chief justice Coulter Osborne made to the province more than two years ago.

“The civil justice reforms will increase the overall effectiveness of the system so that Ontarians have the access to justice they need and deserve,” Attorney General Chris Bentley, who was not available to comment, said in a release. “These reforms will be good for our economy, businesses, and individuals.”

Until now, the process of discovery could be needlessly protracted, Petrillo says. “It can take weeks and weeks and weeks. A lot of time, it’s duplication.”

As of Jan. 1, however, oral examinations for discovery will be limited to seven hours per party.

In addition, a more stringent test of relevance will apply to discovery with a key change in phrasing from “relating to any matter in issue” to “relevant to any matter in issue.”

The principle of proportionality, which weighs the costs against the amount of the claim, must also now be considered on all motions related to discovery.

And all parties must agree to a discovery plan outlining examinations and documents within 60 days of the close of pleadings.

The changes will require lawyers to examine their cases earlier rather than on the eve of trial, ultimately saving clients money on legal fees, Petrillo says.

“Discovery is expensive. It’s one of the biggest ones.”

A second major area targeted by the province is the application of simplified procedure, which eliminates certain legal steps to usher smaller claims through the system more quickly and cheaply.

The limit for simplified procedure matters has now increased from $50,000 to $100,000.

However, as claims approach six figures, simplified procedure matters may warrant oral examinations for discovery, Petrillo says.

As such, the civil rules will now allow for a period of discovery of two hours per party.

In addition, summary judgments will now be available in simplified procedure matters, giving judges greater authority to dispose of unmeritorious cases.

In all civil matters, the summary judgment test can now be applied more widely.

“A judge may now weigh evidence, evaluate credibility, and draw inferences from the evidence and can order oral evidence [mini-trial] with or without time limits,” a provincial document said.

As well, when a trial is necessary, the court will now be able to impose deadlines and limitations.

Some of the biggest changes, however, will be seen in Small Claims Court.

The province is increasing the monetary jurisdiction for Small Claims Court from $10,000 to $25,000, in accordance with other provinces and with Osborne’s recommendations.

However, some lawyers are concerned the province is allocating no new funding to support an increased caseload.

“There’s going to be a ridiculous increase in the amount of files they’re going to be handling,” Petrillo says, adding that the looming changes pose a “potential disaster.”

As a principle, Petrillo welcomes a greater role for small claims courts.

Until now, parties with potential claims in the $10,000 to $25,000 range faced deterrents to pursuing lawsuits due to the prohibitive legal costs relative to the amount in dispute.

Claims of that magnitude often make little sense to lawyers, she adds.

“I think a lot of lawyers are unable to help clients with small files,” Petrillo says, adding that even with simplified procedure rules, smaller claims were untenable.

“You still have to go through all the necessary steps.”

When approached by clients with such claims, she advised them to wait until this month when they could pursue the matter in Small Claims Court as long as there was no limitation deadline to consider.

She suspects many other lawyers gave similar advice, raising the prospect of a sudden surge in matters filed in Small Claims Court.

The court’s heightened jurisdiction will prompt many others to opt for litigation, including credit managers who may now decide to pursue unpaid accounts in court rather than write off the loss, Petrillo says. “It is going to be big.”

But without new judges, court staff or facilities, small claims courts may be swamped by the surge, she notes.

“What’s the point of making Small Claims Court more accessible to people if they have to wait three years to get before a judge?”

In that time, she says a defendant could disappear or dissipate assets.

Such a significant change in jurisdiction requires investment, she argues. “Otherwise, people will be languishing in the court system.”

In an e-mailed response from the Ministry of the Attorney General, a spokesperson said the reforms should not generate any new costs.

“Other provinces that have increased the Small Claims Court limit have done so with little cost,” the ministry said.

  • Simplified Procedure?

    Jeff White
    Simplified Procedure is a cruel misnomer. Now it's going to be even more difficult to settle cases under $100,000 that ought to be settled, because 2 hours of oral discovery is a joke.

    You'd think that discovery was the biggest cost or the biggest waste of money in a civil suit. It is neither of those. Discovery is the biggest single factor that assists the parties to come to a settlement.

    And if the case doesn't settle, counsel have to prepare for trial without having all the information they need. The result is that counsel are forced to conduct discovery at trial, prolonging the proceedings and making litigation more expensive and uncertain.

    And to add final insult to injury the trial judge awards the successful party a pittance in costs because "simplified procedure" is supposed to make litigation less expensive!
  • It will NOT take 3 years to get a trial in SC cour

    Mr. Small Claims Court
    I do not understand the sentiment of 'What is the point of making small claims court more accessible to people if they have to wait three years to get before a judge?' It will NOT take '3 years' to get before a judge. True it may take a little longer now but not 3 years. That is a pure exaggeration. Plus, if you ask the actual parties who can avoid the high cost of lawyers in simplified procedure versus more affordable advice in small claims court, they would all tell you that they're more than happy with the change, even it means a longer wait to have their day in court.
  • Let`s get serious A.G. Bentley

    Pete E.
    “The civil justice reforms will increase the overall effectiveness of the system so that Ontarians have the access to justice they need and deserve,” Attorney General Chris Bentley,.."

    You know what would increase the effectiveness of the Justice System Chris Bentley?

    If you would reserve the Justice System for matters that really need to be before the Courts instead of hauling innocent puppy/dog owners into Court.
    http://tinyurl.com/yaw4too

    ...and if your Gov`t would stop wasting untold millions on litigation costs related to innocent puppy/dog owners.

    http://tinyurl.com/yd8suvj

    Liberals Response to Freedom of Information Request related to Bill 132

    "...disclosure could reasonably be expected to be injurious to the financial interests of the Government of Ontario, ..."

    I would strongly suggest that you and your fellow Liberal MPP`s support Cheri DiNovo`s Bill 222 which will remove BSL(Breed Specific Legislation) from the DOLA.

    Because as long as you continue with this nonsense which is clogging the Courts NO ONE is going to take your attempts to reform the Justice System seriously!
cover image

DIGITAL EDITION

Subscribers get early and easy access to Law Times.

Law Times Poll


It's unknown how widely police in Ontario utilize controversial surveillance techniques that can capture private data from non-targets in criminal investigations. Do you think there should be formal requirements to release this information?
RESULTS ❯