|
Small Claims Court - Transfer to/from Superior Court. Royal Bank of Canada v. Lendak
In Royal Bank of Canada v. Lendak (Ont Divisional Ct, 2024) the Ontario Court of Appeal dismissed an appeal from a Small Claims RBC bank action (which had been transferred from the Superior Court - Simplified Procedure), claiming credit line and credit card debt.
Here the court considered an (apparently) court-initiated transfer from the Superior Court to the Small Claims Court:[9] In his reasons for decision, Justice Stinson set out a detailed history of the matter, which I will not repeat. In the end, Justice Stinson found as follows at para. 25-26:It is undisputable that, through its inherent jurisdiction, the court has authority to control its own processes. If authority for that proposition is required, it may be found in the discussion of this topic by John MacDonald J. in Shoppers Trust Co. v. Mann Taxi Management Ltd. In the exercise of that jurisdiction, the court has an obligation to ensure that scarce court and judicial resources are deployed in a suitable and efficient fashion. Where other proceedings are available and suitable for the resolution of disputes, such as Small Claims Court proceedings, and absent good and valid reasons, the Superior Court should ordinarily direct claims within the monetary jurisdiction of that court to be litigated there. Failure to adhere to that principle, both by litigants and judges, would mean that the scarce resources of the Superior Court of Justice are being unduly overburdened.
These principles are applicable to the present case. There is no reason or need for this case to be litigated in the Superior Court of Justice. I therefore direct that it be transferred to the Small Claims Court at Elliott Lake and henceforth proceed as a matter commenced there. I direct plaintiff's counsel to take the necessary steps to implement this directive and to arrange a telephone case conference with the presiding judge of that court to seek directions as to the next steps in the proceeding. [10] The matter was thereafter transferred to the Small Claims Court in Elliott Lake. . Segura Mosquera v. Rogers Communications Inc.
In Segura Mosquera v. Rogers Communications Inc. (Ont CA, 2021) the Court of Appeal considered an application to transfer a Small Claims matter to the Superior Court:[12] The application judge carefully outlined the principles governing the transfer of cases from the Small Claims Court to the Superior Court. She noted that transfers are permitted only where a claim is not capable of being justly and fairly resolved using the procedures available in the Small Claims Court: Autometric Autobody Inc. v. High Performance Coatings Inc., 2014 ONSC 6073 (Div. Ct.), 328 O.A.C. 197, at paras. 9-10. She noted that the discretion to transfer should be exercised rarely: Crane Canada Co. v. Montis Sorgic Associates Inc., [2006] O.J. No. 1999 (Ont. C.A.), at para. 2. She noted that the onus is on the party seeking a transfer. Considerations in such cases include:a) the complexity of the litigation,
b) the role and importance of pre-trial discovery and expert evidence,
c) whether the case raises issues of general importance, and
d) the desire for a just and fair determination. Farlow v. Hospital for Sick Children, 2009 CanLII 63602 (ON SC), 100 O.R. (3d) 213 (S.C.), at para. 20, citing Crane, at para. 8, Vigna v. Toronto Stock Exchange (1998), 115 O.A.C. 393 (C.J.), and Livingston v. Ould, 2 C.P.C. 41 (Ont. S.C.).
[13] The application judge explained that the court’s discretion to transfer should be exercised sparingly because Superior Court actions expose the parties to higher costs of pre-trial discovery and trial. Further, if the application is made just before trial, it may result in duplication of work. Absent compelling reasons for a transfer, permitting a transfer may undermine the jurisdictional legitimacy of the Small Claims Court.
|
