Search Results

In Canada, judges hold an essential role as impartial decision makers and are entrusted to apply the law fairly and consistently. Their authority carries immense weight on the court system and respecting their decisions is crucial to maintaining the integrity of the court system. Though everyone may not always agree with a judge’s decision, it is important to remember that judges are bound by legal principles and precedents. However, there are rare occasions where a judicial decision may seem unusual. One such instance occurred in R. v. Leclaire, 2025 ONSC 4203 . In this matter, the Respondent plead guilty to impaired driving for the fifth time. This time the Respondent was impaired by drug, namely fentanyl (amongst other drugs), and was driving while under a 2-year driving prohibition. The Crown made it clear that they would be filing a Notice of Application for Increased Penalty, and that by statute the Respondent would need to serve 4 months of jail time, but Justice Jalali had a different plan: [16]           Her Honour then asked the Crown: “ Mr. Jackson what would you do if I sentenced the gentleman to four months conditional anyways?” [17]           The Crown responded, “That is not permitted by statute”. [18]           Her Honour replied:  “I know, but what if I do?”                     The Crown replied: “I will have to seek advice from my management”.   Despite the mandatory minimum sentence, Justice Jalali, who was appointed in October 2018, imposed a four-month conditional sentence with house arrest, citing mitigating factors. While a judge must consider mitigating factors in sentencing, the penalty she imposed disregarded the statute and ultimately undermined the administration of justice. The matter was brought back before the appellate court where the appellate judge set aside Justice Jalali’s sentence. The Respondent was instead sentenced to four months jail. Justice Jalali’s decision not only failed to apply the law correctly but also resulted in a waste of the court’s time and resources sparking quite the backlash on social media platforms and online forums from civilians voicing their opinions and discontentment.   Disclaimer: The content shared here is intended for informational purposes only and should not be taken as legal advice.

There are some upcoming changes to the Small Claims Court procedures coming into effect on October 1, 2025. For those unfamiliar with civil procedure, Small Claims Court is a branch of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice. The first step in any civil matter is to determine which court has jurisdiction. Currently, there are 3 ways to proceed through the court system; simplified procedure for claims up to $200,000; regular procedure for claims of any amount – there is no maximum threshold; and Small Claims Court for monetary claims under $35,000. Small Claims Court is often a more appealing choice to navigate the legal system due to the quicker, simpler, and more affordable process. Currently, the monetary limit an individual can claim in Small Claims Court is $35,000.00, however, as of October 1, 2025, the amendment Ontario Regulation 626/00  increases that limit to $50,000. What does this mean for claimants? Under the old Rules, the courts would see many plaintiffs often choosing to write off thousands of dollars in damages in order for their matter to be heard in Small Claims Court. The new change allows for a larger threshold, and less loss to claimants. The changes are also being implemented to keep up with today’s economy, and to improve access to justice for individuals, all while easing the strain of the higher courts. The last increase to the claim limit was made in 2020 when the limit increased from $25,000 to the current $35,000.

Opposing party not willing to settle? Offer not good enough? If your matter is proceeding to trial, adequate preparation is essential. Follow these steps to ensure you are ready: Gather Evidence : Collate all relevant documents, emails, and communication records that could support your case. For example, if you are disputing a contract, gather copies of the original agreement. There are specific requirements for how your evidence is provided to other parties and to the court - including what colour paper to use, document format, deadlines of when to provide documents to the other party versus to the court... Understand Court Etiquette : Acquaint yourself with the court's rules and procedures. Understanding what to expect can ease your anxiety. For example, knowing how to formally introduce yourself and your case can help you present more effectively. Dress appropriately - business attire is best. Practice Your Presentation : If you represent yourself, rehearse your key points. Practicing can boost your confidence and clarity while presenting before a judge. You can prepare your entire case yourself and then hire someone to represent you only at the hearing. This is called "unbundled representation" or "limited assistance". You can inquire with us via email at: contact@sagelegalsolutions.ca or phone: 289-270-7243

Before your case reaches its conclusion, consider alternative settlement options. These can save you from lengthy, costly court proceedings. Common methods include: Mediation : A neutral mediator facilitates a discussion between both parties to find a mutually acceptable solution. Arbitration : An arbitrator hears both sides and makes a binding decision, which can be faster than traditional trials. Direct Negotiation : Engaging the opposing party in straightforward conversations might lead to an agreement without involving mediators. Usually, lawyers will start with Direct Negotiation first. This can happen at any stage - on first contact to the opposing party, throughout the court process, or right before trial. Lawyers will make recommendations but it is ultimately up to you, the client, to decide what you'd like to offer. Each of these options can offer a path that avoids the complexities and expenses of a trial.

Receiving court papers can feel overwhelming and frightening. Whether it’s a Statement of Claim , a Notice of Motion , or another legal document, it’s easy to feel lost in the legal labyrinth. Statement of Claim in Ontario - instructions to defendant Understanding the Court Papers When served with court papers, it's important to comprehend what these documents mean. Here are common types of court papers you might encounter: Statement of Claim : This outlines the plaintiff's case and the specific reasons for the lawsuit. For example, if someone is suing you for $30,000 in damages related to an unpaid loan, or faulty construction work, the Statement of Claim would explain the incident, the claim amount, and the basis for their complaint. In Small Claims, this is called a Plaintiff's Claim. Notice of Motion : This indicates that a party plans to ask the court for a specific order, such as an i nterim order for return of your personal property . It’s essential to understand what they are asking for and how it might affect you. Defence : If you are the plaintiff, and you receive a defence document, it is crucial to determine whether you are permitted to "Reply" to maintain your legal position. Responding to the Court Papers After receiving court papers, crafting an appropriate response is usually your next step. In Ontario, you typically have 20 days to file a response to a Statement of Claim. Here's how to proceed: Consult with a Lawyer : Engaging a qualified lawyer can significantly enhance your understanding of the situation. For instance, a lawyer can provide targeted advice and help you frame a strong defense tailored to your unique situation. Prepare a Defence : If you choose to represent yourself, draft a Statement of Defence that clearly responds to each allegation made in the claim. Use clear, concise language to explain your side of the story. Consider hiring a lawyer to draft the document for you as part of "unbundled" services. An incorrect defence statement can negatively affect the entire case. File Your Documents : Make sure to file your response with the court and serve a copy to the other party. Following court rules is essential to ensure your documents are accepted. Possible Outcomes Understanding the possible outcomes of your case can help you manage your expectations: Settlement : Many disputes are settled before reaching court through negotiation, often resulting in compromise. In our experience, settlement doesn't usually happen at the initial stages, but towards the end of a matter, prior to trial. Court Hearing : If a settlement cannot be reached, your case may go to trial. Both parties will present their evidence, and a judge will make a ruling based on the facts presented. Default Judgment : If you don’t respond to the court papers, the plaintiff may seek a default judgment against you, leading to significant financial or legal repercussions. Know When to Seek Professional Legal Assistance Consider hiring an experienced lawyer to draft your response or to handle the case entirely. The right legal counsel can change the trajectory of your case. A lawyer can: Translate complex legal language into understandable terms, ensuring you grasp the implications of the documents you receive. Aid in compiling evidence and presenting a compelling case. Handle negotiations on your behalf, increasing the likelihood of securing a favorable settlement. Investing in legal support can save you considerable stress and lead to better outcomes in challenging situations. Please note that this post is not legal advice, as every situation differs. Some information here may not apply to your specific case. A close-up view of a stack of court papers.

Tribunal Watch Ontario says applicants’ lack of legal knowledge accounts for many dismissals. There has been a rise in tribunal-initiated 'motions to dismiss' using a variety of different forms, requiring Applicants to file further legal submissions. Self-represented Applicants are failing to do so, resulting in their complaint being dismissed. The Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario ("HRTO") announced on October 25 a series of proposed procedural changes, including: eliminating summary hearings, case management conference calls, expedited hearings, and interim remedies.   Tribunals Ontario noted that it has made progress in reducing its caseload. In June, the number of active cases totalled 8,800 – nearly a 1,000 reduction from the 9,700 active cases in February 2023. Last year was the first time since 2013 that the tribunal was able to reduce its caseload. At Sage Legal Solutions, we understand that the human rights process can be confusing and time-consuming. If you aren't able to afford hiring a lawyer to take on your entire case, we can assist with a "limited retainer" by editing your application form, or completing further forms as required by the tribunal (HRTO). We can also assist with the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal. For information on limited assistance, you can contact us at: contact@sagelegalsolutions.ca and 289-270-7243.

The Ontario Superior Court declared a lawyer a 'vexatious litigant', barring him from initiating or continuing legal proceedings without prior court approval. This was due to his persistent abusive and harassing behaviour in litigation against the City of Toronto. October 5, 2022: Shane O’Herlihy filed a personal injury lawsuit against Toronto and a city employee, alleging assault at the Jack Layton Ferry Terminal. After the defence was filed,the lawyer embarked on a campaign of harassment, sending 392 emails, voicemails, and letters over 318 days to the defendants, their lawyers, and unrelated parties. His communications included threats to embarrass and harm the lawyers and their families. His motives? Forcing a settlement.

Courts held a secret trial recently. The names of the offender, lawyers and trial judge, and crimes for which the person was convicted, are all withheld. Highly unusual, but likely dealing with confidential informants. https://www.thepeterboroughexaminer.com/news/ontario/the-redacted-court-of-justice-ontario-courts-held-apparently-secret-trial/article_58986e82-4acb-5df4-94ca-228ef2d3cbc7.html?li_source=LI&li_medium=canada

Court ordered a Toronto man to pay $4.7 million to 53 plaintiffs who said he was responsible for cyber harassment and defamation. Defendant refused to apologize or retract any of the defamatory statements. https://www.lawtimesnews.com/practice-areas/privacy-and-data/ontario-court-hands-down-47-million-judgement-against-internet-troll-who-defamed-hr-recruiters/377711

The Ontario Court of Appeal has confirmed that arbitration clauses in employment agreements are, in most cases, an effective means of referring a dispute to arbitration as opposed to being determined in civil court. An arbitration clause is an agreement between contracting parties that certain disputes will be resolved by an arbitrator, not a civil court. Arbitration proceedings are often faster, less costly and more private than those in a court. If an agreement contains an arbitration clause and one party brings a civil claim, the defendant may ask the court to stay the claim and order the matter to arbitration instead. Two years ago, the Supreme Court of Canada released its decision Uber Technologies Inc. v Heller , 2020 SCC 16 , which some have interpreted as limiting the enforceability of arbitration clauses, particularly in employment contracts or independent contractor agreements. However, the Ontario Court of Appeal’s recent decision Irwin v Protiviti , 2022 ONCA 533 confirms that (1) the exception articulated in Uber is a rare exception to the general rule that challenges to arbitration clauses should be referred to the arbitrator, and (2) most arbitration clauses can be relied upon to refer a dispute to arbitration, even in the face of arguments that the clause is not enforceable.

Ontario government asked to increase social assistance rates - Rates are well below the poverty line and have been stagnant since 2018. https://www.lawtimesnews.com/.../ontario.../368910

The company has agreed to reclassify staff on future trips as employees rather than volunteers. Some experts say we can expect to hear more cases like this and the settlement is a sign that the courts are adapting to the new realities of some workplaces. https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/first-in-canada-class-action-settlement-makes-volunteers-employees-1.6547375?fbclid=IwAR2k4SkNLWhTdPYO9a1AtYs3k5ACmZL1C3CVvWH0BinUNI2OXIoEXntWFlQ