1. Skip to navigation
  2. Skip to content
  3. Skip to sidebar

Shakur v. Mitchell Plastics, 2012 ONSC 1780 (S.C.J.) (Rule 57.05 – costs of action brought in wrong court)

Judgment Released: March 16, 2012   Link to Judgment

Rule 57.05(1), stating that a plaintiff in a Superior Court action who recovers less than the monetary jurisdiction of the Small Claims Court might not recover costs, applies even where the monetary jurisdiction of the Small Claims Court increases during the pendency of the action. A plaintiff should not recover costs if they continue a Superior Court action where it is clear that the action now comes within the monetary jurisdiction of the Small Claims Court following an increase in that jurisdiction.

Print Friendly
Shakur v. Mitchell Plastics, 2012 ONSC 1780 (S.C.J.) (Rule 57.05 – costs of action brought in wrong court)

Ali v. Schrauwen, 2011 ONSC 2158 (Master) (Transfer of action from simplified procedure to small claims court)

Judgment Released: April 5, 2011   Link to Judgment

The Court allowed the Plaintiff’s motion to transfer an action, seeking damages of $31,000, from Simplified Procedure to Small Claims Court following the amendments to the monetary jurisdiction of that Court (and thereby limiting the Plaintiff’s claim to $25,000), despite the objections of one Defendant that prejudice would result because the action was “too advanced” to be transferred. Despite having prepared (but not delivered) an affidavit of documents, mediated, listed for trial and pre-tried the action, the Court agreed that there was little disruption to the trial strategy at that stage by a transfer.  The Court ordered that the Plaintiff pay the Defendant $2,800 of the $13,000 it had incurred in costs of the litigation to date, on the basis that those costs may not have been incurred had the action been transferred in January 2010 and noting that Rule 19.05 of the Small Claims Court Rules will limit the Defendant’s recovery of costs going forward.

Print Friendly
Ali v. Schrauwen, 2011 ONSC 2158 (Master) (Transfer of action from simplified procedure to small claims court)

Small Claims Court, Simplified Procedure and Proportionality

Small Claims Court, Simplified Procedure and Proportionality discusses the changes, effective January 1, 2010, to the Ontario Rules of Civil Procedure and cases that have arisen out of the amendments to the Rules that relate to the monetary jurisdiction of the Small Claims Court, the amendments to the Simplified Procedure regime and proportionality.  The paper also discusses cases dealing with awards of costs and transferring cases between Simplified Procedure and the Small Claims Court.

Tiffany Soucy, co-Editor of the FMC Blog on the Amendments to the Rules of Civil Procedure will be speaking at the Ontario Bar Association Civil Litigation Institute 2011 CPD Program, The New Rules: One Year On on Friday, February 5, 2011.

Print Friendly
Small Claims Court, Simplified Procedure and Proportionality

Capano v. Rahm, 2010 ONSC 3241 (S.C.J.) (jurisdiction of Small Claims Court)

Judgment Released: July 7, 2010   Link to Judgment

The plaintiffs moved to transfer a case from the Superior Court to Small Claims Court given the increase in the latter’s monetary jurisdiction from $10,000 to $25,000.  The Court rejected the motion because the defendant did not consent, and consent of all parties is required for transfer under s. 23(2) of the Courts of Justice Act.  In addition, in this case, the litigation had progressed substantially and the defendant would have been put through the unnecessary expense of those prior steps if the transfer was granted. 

The Court also held that both a Master and a Judge have the jurisdiction to hear a motion for transfer.

Print Friendly
Capano v. Rahm, 2010 ONSC 3241 (S.C.J.) (jurisdiction of Small Claims Court)