In an era where headlines about delays and inefficiency dominate coverage of our civil court system, it’s encouraging to see that the Ontario Superior Court of Justice takes its Simplified Rules seriously.
In the recent case of Metivier v. Jacobs, a case conference judge imposed a strict timetable on the parties to a motor vehicle accident case after the defendant questioned whether the trial could be completed within the five-day limit set under the simplified procedure set out in Rule 76 of the Rules of Civil Procedure.
After initial estimates for witness testimony alone came far over the limit, the plaintiff agreed to cut her list of witnesses from eight to five. The judge then imposed a detailed road map for the trial, cutting the estimated time necessary for cross-examinations and re-examination after concluding that he should not “lightly interfere” with the plaintiff’s choice to proceed under the Simplified Rules.
“Having chosen to proceed by way of the Simplified Rules, the plaintiff will bear the burden of ensuring that she can present her case and not interfere with the defendant’s right to fairly defend the case. Should the plaintiff have to forego a witness or two or three, that is a consequence she must live with,” he wrote.
“However, the defendant must also not be permitted to ‘run out the clock’ by conducting an overly lengthy cross-examination.”
Simplified Procedure Basics
The key features of the streamlined procedure available under the Simplified Rules are as follows:
- Claims are capped at $200,000, exclusive of interest and costs
- Oral discoveries are limited to three hours
- Trials may not exceed five days
- Costs recovery is limited at $50,000, with disbursements up to $25,000, exclusive of HST
- No juries, trial by judge only (except for claims arising from slander, libel, malicious arrest, malicious prosecution, and false imprisonment).
Speedy, less costly justice
The attractions of the Simplified Rules are obvious. With strict time limits for both the discovery process and the trial itself, it provides a quicker, more predictable route to resolution for plaintiffs. And with no more than five days allotted for the trial, it’s much easier to schedule a simplified trial than a three- or four-week hearing in front of a jury.
Under the ordinary procedure, the COVID-19 pandemic has exacerbated a backlog of cases in Ontario courts that was already out of control, thanks to a lack of judges and inadequate resourcing. Trial sittings may be held just twice a year, depending on your jurisdiction, and there is no guarantee that your case will be called, even if it is scheduled.
The cap on costs and disbursements also provides some very welcome certainty to litigants since the spiralling expense of a long, drawn-out jury trial is one of the biggest concerns for anyone involved in a legal claim.
Another pro for many plaintiffs is that juries are not allowed in trials that proceed under the Simplified Rules, thanks to the pervasive idea in the personal injury field that juries are less sympathetic to plaintiffs than judges. The accuracy of that belief is debatable, although it is borne out by jury notice preferences in motor vehicle cases since the vast majority are delivered by defendant insurers.
Is the Simplified Procedure right for you?
At Edwards Pollard in Oakville, ON, our personal injury lawyers find that the Simplified Rules are a useful mechanism for many of our clients — particularly those whose cases involve minimal economic losses and future care needs.
Still, the process won’t work for everyone and is simply not feasible for cases involving very serious injuries, where the expected damages easily exceed the $200,000 cap.
Some clients on the borderline $200,000 limit may be prepared to sacrifice some of the potential value in their claim to move it forward in a more efficient manner.
Although it can be tricky to estimate the value of a claim accurately, we address the issue of the appropriate procedure at an early stage, helping them make an assessment.
If there was one thing I could change about the Simplified Rules, it’s the monetary limit. Although it was only extended in 2020 from $100,000, it would be great to see the cap rise again to $250,000 or even $300,000 to capture a larger number of those marginal cases.
Get a Free Consultation with Our Personal Injury Lawyer in Oakville
If you have been injured due to someone else’s negligence and would like to explore your legal options with a personal injury lawyer in Oakville, feel free to contact me or another member of the legal team at Edwards Pollard LLP. Call us for a free consultation at (289) 529-0404.