Civil Rules Committee

A. Overview of the Civil Rules Committee

The Rules of Civil Procedure set out the procedural steps that apply to civil law matters at the Superior Court of Justice and the Court of Appeal for OntarioThe Rules of the Small Claims Court set out the procedural steps that apply in the Small Claims Court. Each set of rules has the status of a regulation under the Courts of Justice Act and is published on the Ontario e-Laws website.

The Civil Rules Committee makes changes to these two sets of rules, subject to the approval of the Attorney General.[1]

The aim of the Committee is to make changes to the rules that enhance access to justice for the benefit of users of the civil justice system.

Section 66 of the Courts of Justice Act sets out the subject matter over which the Committee has authority to make rules.

The Committee meets regularly throughout the year to consider proposals from judges, lawyers, and members of the public for rule changes. The Committee often consults with members of the bar, justice sector stakeholders, and the public on potential rule changes.

The Civil Rules Committee is not part of the Ministry of the Attorney General.

B. Committee Membership and Support

The members of the Committee are set out in section 65 of the Courts of Justice Act.

1. Chair

Under section 65 of the Courts of Justice Act, the Committee is chaired by the Chief Justice of Ontario or another member designated by the Chief Justice. The Honourable Justice Peter Lauwers of the Court of Appeal for Ontario is the current Chair of the Committee, as designated by the Chief Justice. The Chair leads the Committee in its work, including prioritizing issues for consideration by the Committee and facilitating all Committee meetings.

2. Secretary

Shannon Chace, the Court of Appeal for Ontario’s Executive Legal Officer, is the Secretary of the Committee. The Secretary is responsible for the overall operations of the Committee. The Secretary is not a member of the Committee and does not participate in votes of the Committee.

3. Committee Members

The Civil Rules Committee’s membership includes members of the judiciary, Ministry of the Attorney General management and counsel, and private sector lawyers. Each member is appointed to the Committee by one of the Chief Justices, the Attorney General or the Law Society of Ontario. The membership is listed below, at Part H.

Most members hold their position for three years and are eligible for reappointment. Members volunteer their time to the Committee. Members review, consider, and vote on proposals and other issues raised at meetings. Members may consult with the constituencies they represent about issues before the Committee. Members may also make proposals to the Committee for rule amendments.

In addition, members often provide their time and expertise by participating in subcommittees struck to consider particular issues.

4. Secretariat

The work of the Committee is supported by a Secretariat, which is composed of four lawyers appointed by the Chair – three civil litigators from the private bar and a lawyer from the Ministry. The Secretariat members are not members of the Committee and do not participate in votes of the Committee. The members are listed below, at Part I.

The Secretariat’s work is primarily directed by the Secretary on behalf of the Chair. The Secretariat provides research support and background materials for the Committee to assist with proposals where the complexity warrants their expert analysis. In addition, the Secretariat may identify and pursue areas of interest, and advance their own proposals for the Committee’s consideration.

C. How the Civil Rules Committee Works

The Committee typically meets four times a year, or more often if necessary.

The Secretary, in consultation and collaboration with the Chair and the Secretariat, sets the Committee’s meeting agenda. Standing items on the agenda include: the Chair’s report, approval of the minutes of the previous meeting, the Secretary’s report, and reports from the standing and ad hoc subcommittees.

At each meeting, the Committee also considers proposals for rule changes. Anyone, including legal professionals and members of the public, can write to the Secretary of the Committee to suggest a rule change. See Part E below on how to propose a rule change.

The Chair and Secretary review all proposals and have discretion to determine whether a proposal should be considered by the Committee and placed on a meeting agenda and, if so, the timing for such consideration. The Chair and Secretary also triage proposals for urgency and assess, in consultation with the Secretariat, whether Secretariat review is required.

Where a proposal merits consideration but is not urgent and has some complexity, it may be placed on the agenda of a subsequent meeting. The Chair and Secretary may determine that Secretariat review and analysis is required before the proposal may be placed on an agenda for consideration by the Committee.

The Chair and Secretary may also ask a standing subcommittee to consider a proposal for a rule change or strike an ad hoc subcommittee to consider a proposal. . Subcommittees may be struck where the proposal is complex, requires extensive deliberation or special expertise. Subcommittees’ mandates differ, but they frequently engage in formal consultations with bar constituencies. For a list of current subcommittees, please see Part D, below.

Where a determination is made that a particular issue does not require consideration by the Committee, the Chair will provide the Committee with a description of the proposal and the rationale for not considering the proposal. All other proposals are considered and voted on by the Committee.

Deliberations of the Committee and materials prepared by or for the Committee are confidential.

Regulations amending the Rules of Civil Procedure and Rules of the Small Claims Court are made by the Committee and must then be approved by the Attorney General.

The amending regulations are viewable on the Ontario e-Laws website upon filing. Amended court forms are viewable on the Court Services Division court forms website upon the filing of a regulation amending the forms. Notices of the amending regulations are published on the Ontario Regulatory Registry website.

D. Subcommittees of the Civil Rules Committee

The Committee’s work is supported by both standing and ad hoc subcommittees. The Chair of each subcommittee is appointed by the Chair of the Committee.

Generally, subcommittees include representation from the judiciary, the bar, the Ministry and other appropriate constituencies. The Committee Chair and relevant Subcommittee Chair will jointly determine the appropriate composition of each subcommittee, taking into account the implications of the issues for justice sector stakeholders. The members may be drawn from both the Committee membership and, if necessary, broader stakeholder constituencies; they are selected for their interest and expertise in the Subcommittee’s mandate.

1. Standing Subcommittees

Standing subcommittees may be established to study and propose amendments to particular rules and issues on an ongoing and long-term basis.

a. Estates Subcommittee

The Estates Subcommittee supports the Committee by analyzing and advising on proposals to amend the estate court rules and forms (Rules 74 to 75.2 of the Rules of Civil Procedure). The Subcommittee develops proposals and potential amendments to the estate court rules and forms to streamline estate court processes, improve access to justice and align the estate court rules with broader legislative reforms.

b. Artificial Intelligence Subcommittee

The Artificial Intelligence Subcommittee supports the Committee by analyzing and advising on proposals with respect to the use of artificial intelligence and technology in the litigation process.

2. Ad Hoc Subcommittees

Ad hoc subcommittees may be established to consider and address specific proposals or areas of concern, as directed by the Chair. Ad hoc subcommittees contribute to the Committee’s capacity to fulfill its mandate, by allowing for greater group deliberation and/or enhanced expertise on issues of particular urgency or complexity.

a. Discount Rate Subcommittee

Pursuant to section 66(4) of the Courts of Justice Act, the Committee is required to review the discount rate, gross-up rate, and prejudgment interest rate for non-pecuniary damages at least once every four years. To assist in fulfilling this mandate, the Committee strikes an ad hoc Discount Rate Subcommittee on a periodic basis.

The most recent Discount Rate Subcommittee was struck by the Committee in May 2017 and tabled its final report at the Civil Rules Committee meeting held on May 20, 2021: Report to the Civil Rules Committee on rules 53.09 and 53.10 (final). The Committee voted to adopt the recommendations in the report and submitted the report to the Attorney General.

For reference, a copy of the Discount Rate Subcommittee’s interim report, dated April 27, 2020, is also available: Report to the Civil Rules Committee on rules 53.09 and 53.10 (interim).

b. Rule 7 Subcommittee

The mandate of the Rule 7 Subcommittee is to review Rule 7 of the Rules of Civil Procedure (Parties under Disability), to address issues identified in the case law and consider the adequacy of procedural safeguards to protect the interests of minors, mentally incapable adults, and absentees, alongside the integrity of the justice system for all participants, including the court and its resources.

c. Rule 34 Subcommittee

The mandate of the Rule 34 Subcommittee is to consider potential amendments to Rule 34 (Procedure on Oral Examinations), including consideration of the consent-based procedure to arrange for out-of-court examinations; the time and expense of motions to resolve disputes respecting out-of-court examinations; the procedure to resolve objections and the method of attendance (rule 1.08); and the examination process for examinees residing outside Ontario.

d. Bifurcation Subcommittee

The mandate of the Bifurcation Subcommittee is to consider potential amendments to Rule 6.1 (Separate Hearings) respecting the availability of bifurcation of trials.

e. Partial Settlement Subcommittee

The mandate of the Partial Settlement Subcommittee is to consider whether a new rule should be added to the Rules of Civil Procedure to codify common law obligations respecting disclosure of partial settlements in certain situations.

f. Refusals Motions Subcommittee

The mandate of the Refusals Motions Subcommittee is to consider eliminating Rule 34.12(3), which allows for a motion to rule on the propriety of a question that is objected to and not answered in an oral examination.

E. How to Make a Proposal to the Civil Rules Committee for a Rule Change

Proposals for rule changes may be sent to the Secretary of the Committee at: CRC.Secretary@ontario.ca.

All proposals should specify:

  1. the relevant rule(s);
  2. the nature and scope of the issue to be addressed; and
  3. any relevant background about the issue that the proposal is intended to address.

It is also helpful for the proposal to include a suggested solution to the issue identified.

Persons who put forward proposals will be advised of the outcome of their proposal. Depending on the urgency and other priorities of the Committee, proposals may take some time to be considered.

F. Recent Notable Changes to the Rules

1. Certificates of Service for legal professionals – 2023

Effective January 30, 2023, the Committee introduced certificates of service for use by legal professionals as an alternative to affidavits of service in the Rules of Civil Procedure and the Rules of Small Claims Court. Certificates of service, which are available to lawyers in the Superior Court of Justice and Court of Appeal and to both lawyers and paralegals in the Small Claims Court, need not be commissioned, saving costs and resources.

2. Simplification of the Probate Process – 2021, 2022 & 2023

Effective April 1, 2021, May 28, 2021, January 1, 2022, July 1, 2022, and July 6, 2023 the Committee, supported by the Estates Subcommittee, introduced a series of amendments to simplify and streamline the court process for probate applications.

3. Reducing Adjourned Trials Due to Late Expert Evidence – 2022

Effective March 31, 2022, the Committee made amendments regarding the service of experts’ reports, the scheduling of pre-trial conferences, the test for leave to admit evidence at trial, and other related provisions to reduce the number of adjourned trials.

4. Electronic processes in civil court proceedings – 2020 & 2021

Effective March 23, 2020, January 1, 2021, March 1, 2021, and May 24, 2021, the Committee introduced a number of amendments to the Rules of Civil Procedure and Rules of the Small Claims Court to facilitate the use of electronic processes for filing and issuance of documents, signatures, and service.

See Part J, below, for a full list of civil court rule changes made by the Committee since 2020.

G. Announcements

Letters Regarding Delay in the Civil Justice System

In response to letters received from the President of the Advocates’ Society to Chief Justice Tulloch and Justice Feldman as Chair of the Committee with respect to delay in the civil justice system, please see the joint responding letter from Chief Justice Tulloch and Justice Feldman.

Chair Announcement: Thank you to Justice Feldman and Welcome to Justice Lauwers

CJustice Feldman and Justice Lauwers

Thank you to Justice Feldman for her outstanding service and dedication to the administration of justice during her tenure as a member and then Chair of the Civil Rules Committee. Justice Feldman was appointed to the Committee in February 2017 and was appointed Chair of the Committee in June 2020. In her tenure as Chair, in addition to addressing proposals from members of the bar, Justice Feldman has herself proactively identified problems facing the justice system as it navigated the pandemic and post-pandemic landscape and has led the Committee in taking swift action to address those problems. Under Justice Feldman’s leadership, the Committee has significantly increased its subcommittee complement to better respond by consulting with relevant stakeholders and recommending solutions for the most pressing problems. Justice Feldman retires from the Court of Appeal at the end of 2023. We wish her all the best in her retirement.

We would also like to welcome Justice Lauwers as the new Chair of the Committee. Justice Lauwers was appointed to the Committee in February 2017. Justice Lauwers chaired the Committee’s Expert Evidence Subcommittee, which led to reforms on how expert evidence is filed in trials. He is also the Chair of the Committee’s standing subcommittee on the use of Artificial Intelligence in the civil litigation process. Justice Lauwers looks forward to leading the Committee and to continue making changes to the rules that enhance access to justice for the benefit of users of the civil justice system.

Changes Regarding Civil Appeal Factum Requirements

The Civil Rules Committee changed the requirements for civil appeal factums through O. Reg. 383/23; the regulation was approved by the Attorney General and came into force on January 1, 2024. There are two reforms to note regarding appeal factums filed in the Ontario Court of Appeal and the Divisional Court.

First, parts I to V of factums cannot exceed 9,200 words and 40 pages. A factum that exceeds either limit does not meet the requirement (rule 61.11(3) and 61.12(5.1)). As set out in rules 61.11(4) and 61.12(5.2), the word count must take into account all words in parts I to V of the factum, including words used in

  • citations,
  • footnotes,
  • headings,
  • charts,
  • diagrams and
  • other visual aids.

The certificate for a factum must state the number of words in the factum and that the factum complies with this rule or with an order of the court. The word count and page limits allow for approximately the same number of words as the former 30-page limit, while at the same time allowing for

  • more white space,
  • more effective use of headers,
  • more enumerated lists,
  • more chunking (shorter, sequential paragraphs),
  • diagrams where of assistance, and
  • clearer citations to authorities.

For a transition period, the Courts will accept for filing both factums that meet the previous limit of 30 pages and factums that meet the new limit of 9,200 words and fewer than 40 pages. The Civil Rules Committee welcomes any feedback on this rule amendment to: crc.secretary@ontario.ca.

The second reform responds in part to several reported incidents in North America in which lawyers cited authorities that were not authentic but were made up by Artificial Intelligence. In certifying a factum, certifiers must now confirm they are satisfied as to the authenticity of every authority listed in Schedule A of the factum. An authority that is published on a government website or otherwise by a government printer, on the Canadian Legal Information Institute website (CanLII), on a court’s website or by a commercial publisher of court decisions is presumed to be authentic for this purpose, absent evidence to the contrary (rule 61.11(5) and 61.12(5.3)).

These requirements are set out in rr. 61.11 and 61.12. For more information, please see O. Reg. 383/23 made under the Courts of Justice Act, amending the Rules of Civil Procedure, as well as a summary of amendments on Ontario’s Regulatory Registry.

H. Current Committee Members

1. Court of Appeal for Ontario

  • The Honourable Justice Peter Lauwers, Committee Chair, appointed pursuant to Courts of Justice Act s. 65(2)(a) and s. 65(3)
  • The Honourable Justice Julie A. Thorburn, judge of the Court of Appeal for Ontario, appointed pursuant to Courts of Justice Act s. 65(2)(b)

2. Superior Court of Justice

  • The Honourable Geoffrey Morawetz, Chief Justice of the Superior Court of Justice, appointed pursuant to Courts of Justice Act s. 65(2)(a.1)
  • The Honourable Faye E. McWatt, Associate Chief Justice of the Superior Court of Justice, appointed pursuant to Courts of Justice Act s. 65(2)(a.1)
  • The Honourable Regional Senior Justice Mark Edwards, judge of the Superior Court of Justice, appointed pursuant to Courts of Justice Act s. s. 65(2)(c)
  • The Honourable Regional Senior Justice Gregory Ellies, judge of the Superior Court of Justice, appointed pursuant to Courts of Justice Act s. s. 65(2)(c)
  • The Honourable Regional Senior Justice Stephen Firestone, judge of the Superior Court of Justice, appointed pursuant to Courts of Justice Act s. 65(2)(c)
  • The Honourable Regional Senior Justice Calum MacLeod, judge of the Superior Court of Justice, appointed pursuant to Courts of Justice Act s. 65(2)(c)
  • The Honourable Regional Senior Justice Paul R. Sweeny, judge of the Superior Court of Justice, appointed pursuant to Courts of Justice Act s. 65(2)(c)
  • The Honourable Justice Jennifer Bezaire, judge of the Superior Court of Justice, appointed pursuant to Courts of Justice Act s. 65(2)(c)
  • The Honourable Justice Michael G. Emery, judge of the Superior Court of Justice, appointed pursuant to Courts of Justice Act s. 65(2)(c)
  • The Honourable Justice Darla Wilson, judge of the Superior Court of Justice, appointed pursuant to Courts of Justice Act s. 65(2)(c)

3. Ontario Court of Justice

  • The Honourable Sharon Margaret Nicklas, Chief Justice of the Ontario Court of Justice, represented by the Honourable Justice O’Connell, appointed pursuant to Courts of Justice Acts. 65(2)(a.2)

4. Small Claims Court

  • The Honourable Justice L. Ntoukas, Small Claims Court Administrative judge, appointed pursuant to Courts of Justice Act65(2)(d)

5. Ministry of the Attorney General

  • Joshua Hunter, senior counsel, representing the Attorney General, appointed pursuant to Courts of Justice Act s. 65(2)(e)
  • Susan Keenan, counsel, Law Officer of the Crown, appointed pursuant to Courts of Justice Act s. 65(2)(f)
  • Beverly Leonard, Assistant Deputy Attorney General, Court Services Division, appointed pursuant to Courts of Justice Act s. 65(2)(g)
  • Linda Omazic, counsel, Court Services Division, appointed pursuant to Courts of Justice Act s. 65(2)(g)

6. Lawyers of the Private Bar

  • Ranjan Das, appointed pursuant to Courts of Justice Act s. 65(2)(h)
  • Barbara Legate, appointed pursuant to Courts of Justice Act s. 65(2)(h)
  • Kathryn Manning, appointed pursuant to Courts of Justice Act s. 65(2)(h)
  • Anne Tardif, appointed pursuant to Courts of Justice Act s. 65(2)(h)
  • W. A. D. Millar, appointed pursuant to Courts of Justice Act s. 65(2)(i)
  • Etienne Esquega, appointed pursuant to Courts of Justice Act s. 65(2)(j)
  • Darcy Romaine, appointed pursuant to Courts of Justice Act 65(2)(j)
  • Mary-Anne Strong, appointed pursuant to Courts of Justice Act s. 65(2)(j
  • Margaret Waddell, appointed pursuant to Courts of Justice Act s. 65(2)(j)

I. Current Members of the Secretariat

  • Jennifer Anderson, counsel, Ministry of the Attorney General
  • Jeff Cowan, private bar
  • Derek McKay, private bar
  • Michael Watson, private bar

J. Recent Regulations Amending the Rules of Civil Procedure and Small Claims Court Rules (Since 2020)

1. Effective in 2023

  • Reg. 188/23: Amendments made to the RCP simplify probate application processes, effective July 6, 2023.
  • Reg. 520/22: Amendments made to the RCP to introduce a new lawyer’s certificate of service for proof of service, effective January 30, 2023.
  • Reg. 521/22: Amendments made to the SCCR to introduce a new lawyer and paralegal certificate of service for proof of service, effective January 30, 2023.

2. Effective in 2022

  • Reg. 709/21: Amendments made to the RCP to simplify the probate process under Rule 74 and align with legislative amendments, effective January 1, 2022.
  • Reg. 18/22: Amendments made to the RCP regarding the service of experts’ reports, the scheduling of pre-trial conferences, and the test for leave to admit evidence, effective March 31, 2022.
  • Reg. 224/22: Amendments made to the RCP regarding the deadlines for parties to submit their confirmation of motion and confirmation of application forms, as well as the deadline to upload materials to CaseLines, effective April 23, 2022.
  • Reg. 435/22: Amendments made to the RCP to simplify probate processes relating to estate administration bond and tax requirements and other administrative changes, effective July 1, 2022.

3. Effective in 2021

  • Reg. 689/20: Amendments made to the RCP to establish new electronic processes in civil court proceedings, effective January 1, 2021.
  • Reg. 690/20: Amendments made to the RCP to streamline and clarify probate processes under Rule 74, to expand the methods of service of a notice of probate application and to align the rules with legislative amendments, effective January 8, 2021.
  • Reg. 711/20: Amendments made to the RCP to align the court rules with legislative amendments that removed the office of a traditional master and make administrative amendments relating to the CaseLines rules, effective January 8, 2021.
  • Reg. 107/21: Amendments made to the RCP to authorize email service on the Crown and related entities as an alternative to personal service, effective March 1, 2021.
  • Reg. 108/21: Amendments made to the SCCR to establish new electronic processes in Small Claims Court proceedings, effective March 1, 2021.
  • Reg. 111/21: Amendments made to the RCP to create a new probate process for small estates, effective April 1, 2021.
  • Reg. 248/21: Amendments made to the RCP to align with recent changes to civil rules and forms and to make other administrative changes, effective April 6, 2021.
  • Reg. 249/21: Amendments made to the SCCR relating to electronic filing and issuance of documents in the Small Claims Court, effective May 24, 2021.
  • Reg. 383/21: Amendments made to the RCP relating to case management masters and associate judges, and other administrative amendments to the estate court rules, effective May 28, 2021.
  • Reg. 343/21: Amendments made to the RCP to reduce the time to place a defended action on a trial list and revoke obsolete timing provisions, effective July 1, 2021.
  • Reg. 526/21: Amendments made to the RCP to revise the process for fixing the method of attendance for out-of-court steps in a proceeding, effective September 1, 2021.

4. Effective in 2020

  • Reg. 344/19: Amendments made to the RCP to increase the monetary threshold of Simplified Procedure actions and related amendments and relating to garnishment court forms filed in the Superior Court of Justice, effective January 1, 2020.
  • Reg. 455/19: Amendments made to the RCP relating to materials filed in motions for leave to appeal to the Divisional Court pursuant to rule 62.02, effective January 1, 2020.
  • Reg. 456/19: Amendments made to the RCP relating to the electronic filing and electronic issuance of documents in civil actions, effective March 23, 2020.
  • Reg. 441/20: Amendments made relating to the RCP relating to electronic filing and issuance of documents in Superior Court of Justice civil actions and applications, effective August 5, 2020.
  • Reg. 496/20: Amendments made to the RCP to make Rule 12 (Class Proceedings and Other Representative Proceedings), consistent with statutory amendments to the Class Proceedings Act, effective October 1, 2020.
  • Reg. 316/20: Amendments made to the RCP to make the rules consistent with statutory amendments relating to the Crown Liability and Proceedings Act, effective July 1, 2020.

[1] The Family Law Rules are the responsibility of the Family Rules Committee.

This website is maintained by the Judges' Library. Website Policies