Category Archives: Civil Procedure

Supreme Court Empowers Summary Judgment Motion Judges

In its January 2014 decision in Hryniak v. Mauldin[1] the Supreme Court of Canada sought to further clarify both the test for summary judgment and a judge’s powers on a motion for summary judgment.

New Standard on Motions for Summary Judgment since 2010 Rules Change

In civil litigation in Ontario the Rules of Civil Procedure, at Rule 20, provide both plaintiffs and defendants with the opportunity to bring a motion and bring an end to the litigation in certain circumstanced.

In January 2010 potentially substantial amendments were made to Rule 20 which now provides that “the court shall grant summary judgment” if it is “satisfied that there is no genuine issue  requiring a trial with respect to a claim or a defence”.   This first amendment changed the standard from “for trial” to “requiring a trial“.

Emergency Injunctive Relief by Ontario Courts

A frequent concern in bringing a lawsuit to solve a problem is that it often takes a long time for lawsuits to get resolved (ie. years rather than months).

This is particularly problematic if you are suffering imminent or ongoing harm as opposed to having suffered an identifiable monetary loss and are simply seeking to recover the lost amount. 

Pre-Arbitration Interim Relief by Courts

Where parties have an agreement to arbitrate disputes which may arise between them, typically, the Courts have no role to play until after an arbitrator (or an arbitral tribunals) has made a decision of some nature.  Then the parties can avail themselves of certain appeal rights under the Ontario Arbitration Act, 1991, S.O. 1991, c. 17, see for example sections 45 and 46.

Norwich orders: pre-action discovery

When a potential claimant has been wronged but lacks essential information necessary to commence a claim a Norwich Orders can be a useful tactic to fill in the blanks by compelling a third party to provide the claimant with the missing information.