Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 11 MARCH 2014

Short And Sweet: SCC Clarifies Summary Judgment Rules, Judicial Powers

The Supreme Court of Canada recently clarified how motion judges should exercise their fact-finding and summary judgment powers under rule 20.04(2.1) and (2.2) of the Rules of Civil Procedure. In Hryniak v. Mauldin, 2014 SCC 7 ...

CanadaLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration
Affleck Greene McMurtry LLP
Affleck Greene McMurtry LLP
Author LinkedIn connections

The Supreme Court of Canada recently clarified how motion judges should exercise their fact-finding and summary judgment powers under rule 20.04(2.1) and (2.2) of the Rules of Civil Procedure. In Hryniak v. Mauldin, 2014 SCC 7, the Court affirmed a >motion judge's finding that the applicant Hryniak committed the tort of civil fraud, having absconded US$10 million from various investors, including the respondents to the appeal.  While both the Ontario Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court found that this was not an appropriate case for summary judgment, they were satisfied that the evidentiary record supported the motion judge's finding, and thus deferred to his decision. In the process, the Court clarified a two-step test for summary judgment motions, explained when a motion judge should exercise her fact-finding powers, and reiterated the standard of review for a summary judgment decision.

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

See more popular content from