Canada: A Breath Of Fresh Air: Ontario Court Of Appeal Takes A "Fresh Approach" To Motions For Summary Judgment

One of the biggest Ontario litigation developments in 2011 was the Court of Appeal's unanimous five-judge panel decision in Combined Air Mechanical Services Inc. v Flesch.1 In it, the Court of Appeal took what it called a "fresh approach" to motions for summary judgment governed by Rule 20 of the Ontario Rules of Civil Procedure. The decision has potentially significant implications for all litigators looking to shorten legal proceedings.


The decision in Combined Air involved appeals from five separate decisions of the lower courts on motions for summary judgment. Following the amendments to the Rules of Civil Procedure that came into force in January 2010, the law was, as the Court of Appeal acknowledged, "unsettled."

Prior to the amendments (amendments largely influenced by the Osborne Report2), a line of case law restricted judges' ability to weigh the evidence, draw inferences and evaluate credibility. Furthermore, a presumption was enshrined in Rule 20 that substantial indemnity costs be awarded against an unsuccessful moving party. The combined effect was that courts were hesitant to grant summary judgment when there were any evidentiary disputes and litigators were leery of facing possible cost consequences on the higher substantial indemnity scale in the event the motion failed. In the result, motions for summary judgment were brought only in the clearest of circumstances.

Following the amendments coming into force, divergent lines of authority developed as to how the amended rule was to be applied. It was against this background that the Ontario Court of Appeal proposed "a fresh approach."

Decision of the Court of Appeal

The Court of Appeal contextualized its decision with an extensive review of the operation of Rule 20 prior to the amendments and the recommendations of the Osborne Report.

In its legal analysis, the court stated that eliminating unnecessary trials – not all trials – was the purpose of Rule 20. The court identified three general types of cases suitable for summary judgment, but added that it is unnecessary for a motions judge to categorize a particular case, as there may be overlap. The first category of cases are those where the parties agree to have all or part of the claim determined by summary judgment. The second is composed of claims or defences without merit. The third group of cases are those cases where there is "no genuine issue requiring a trial," in that the trial process is not required in the "interest of justice." It is this final category that was brought into existence by the amendments to Rule 20.

Full appreciation test

In its analysis of when the interest of justice requires a trial, the Court of Appeal noted that the trial process has unique attributes that set it apart from a motion for summary judgment. This includes a trial judge's "privileged position" and "total familiarity" with the evidence and the "trial narrative," which allows effective advocates the ability to structure their case in the most compelling manner possible. The court formulated the test for whether summary judgment can be granted as a question which the motion judge must ask him- or herself: "Can the full appreciation of the evidence and issues that is required to make dispositive findings be achieved by way of summary judgment, or can this full appreciation only be achieved by way of a trial?" The court named this the "full appreciation test," and emphasized that fully appreciating the evidence, in this sense, differed from simply having factual familiarity with the evidence in the motion record. This is the "fresh approach" the court was introducing.

Litigation strategy guidance

Additionally, the court made several comments that are likely to aid counsel in formulating litigation strategy. First, it stated that in cases where the "the nature and complexity of the issues" make a motion for summary judgment premature prior to production of documents and oral discovery, a party should move to stay or dismiss the motion via a motion for directions under rules 1.04(1), (1.1),(2) and 1.05. Second, on a failed motion for summary judgment, costs are now presumed to be awarded on a partial indemnity basis as opposed to on a substantial indemnity basis, unless the motion was brought unreasonably, thus removing a strong disincentive to litigants from bringing a motion for summary judgment. The court noted that the reasonability of bringing a motion would become more closely scrutinized as the jurisprudence concerning summary judgment developed.


The five-judge panel decision in Combined Air clearly arose out of the Court of Appeal's desire to provide litigators with clarity and predictability on motions for summary judgment since the amendments were introduced in January 2010. However, it remains to be seen whether the decision will have that effect.

The wording of the full appreciation test is outwardly highly discretionary. The court's analysis of the concept of full appreciation of the evidence notwithstanding, the decision's discussion of which types of cases are amenable to summary judgment provides more tangible guidance. Cases where there are few facts in dispute, where there are relatively few witnesses, where the evidence is not contentious, where any issues requiring supplementation from oral evidence are narrow and discrete, and where the governing legal principles are well established are cases appropriate for summary judgment.

By contrast, cases with numerous witnesses, where multiple assessments of credibility will be required to reach a decision, where the evidence is complex and conflicts on important issues, and where the documentary evidence required is both extensive and possibly unreliable are not appropriate cases for summary judgment. This would seem self-evident to any experienced counsel, whether under the previous or current Rule.


Complicating this analysis, however, are the outcomes in Mauldin v Hryniak and Bruno Appliance and Furniture v Hryniak, two of the appeals heard. The motion for summary judgment in each action, which were held together, had a total of 18 witnesses who filed affidavits, cross-examination which lasted three weeks, 28 volumes of evidence, and oral argument which spanned four days, at the end of which the plaintiffs submitted a bill of costs for $1.7 million. Although the Court of Appeal stated that "going forward" such actions should be decided by trial, the court refused to set aside the Mauldin action on the basis that the decision had been reached "after careful scrutiny of an extensive record" by the motions judge and the law had still been undecided at the time the judgment was written. Implicit appears to have been a laudable desire to prevent the parties, and the court, from wasting resources in a trial which, in the Court of Appeal's view, would almost inevitably have the same outcome as the motion for summary judgment.3 However, the appeal was allowed in the Bruno Appliance action on the basis that a genuine issue existed for trial.

Several points connected to motions for summary judgment continue to require clarification. The court noted that a party opposing a Rule 20 motion on the basis that discovery and document exchange are required may bring a motion for directions under rules 1.04(1), (1.1), (2) and 1.05 to develop a record capable of satisfying the full appreciation test. Presumably, the judge hearing the motion would need to be convinced a more complete evidentiary picture would allow a full appreciation of the case to be made.

Use of Rule 20

Although it remains to be seen how lower courts will apply the Court of Appeal's decision, three aspects of the judgment suggest that Rule 20 motions are likely to gain greater use. First, the court's reminder that (as stated in the Rule) costs are now on a presumptive partial indemnity scale decreases the financial risk associated with a failed motion. Second, the decision's emphasis on the ability of the court to make directions to "salvage" materials used on a failed motion means that resources prepared for an unsuccessful motion are not necessarily wasted. Third, there is now clear authority that summary judgment may still be granted in the face of contested evidence, as long as the judge hearing the motion can develop a full appreciation of the evidence and issues so as to make a dispositive finding. Together, these three aspects of the amended Rule 20, and the endorsement of their usage by the Court of Appeal, will provide counsel with greater freedom to explore the usage of motions for summary judgment to bring a timely and cost-efficient end to legal disputes.

The author wishes to thank Ms. Jenna Anne de Jong, articling student, for her help in preparing this legal update.


1 Combined Air Mechanical Services Inc. v. Flesch, 2011 ONCA 764 [Combined Air].

2 The Honourable Coulter A. Osborne, Q.C. Civil Justice Reform Project: Summary of Findings and Recommendations (Toronto: Ontario Ministry of the Attorney General, 2007) [The Osborne Report].

3 It was reported in legal media outlets that Hryniak intends to seek leave to appeal this decision to the Supreme Court.

Norton Rose Group

Norton Rose Group is a leading international legal practice. We offer a full business law service to many of the world's pre-eminent financial institutions and corporations from offices in Europe, Asia, Australia, Canada, Africa, the Middle East, Latin America and Central Asia.

Knowing how our clients' businesses work and understanding what drives their industries is fundamental to us. Our lawyers share industry knowledge and sector expertise across borders, enabling us to support our clients anywhere in the world. We are strong in financial institutions; energy; infrastructure, mining and commodities; transport; technology and innovation; and pharmaceuticals and life sciences.

We have more than 2900 lawyers operating from 43 offices in Abu Dhabi, Almaty, Amsterdam, Athens, Bahrain, Bangkok, Beijing, Bogotá, Brisbane, Brussels, Calgary, Canberra, Cape Town, Caracas, Casablanca, Dubai, Durban, Frankfurt, Hamburg, Hong Kong, Johannesburg, London, Melbourne, Milan, Montréal, Moscow, Munich, Ottawa, Paris, Perth, Piraeus, Prague, Québec, Rome, Shanghai, Singapore, Sydney, Tokyo, Toronto and Warsaw; and from associate offices in Dar es Salaam, Ho Chi Minh City and Jakarta.

Norton Rose Group comprises Norton Rose LLP, Norton Rose Australia, Norton Rose Canada LLP, Norton Rose South Africa (incorporated as Deneys Reitz Inc), and their respective affiliates.

On January 1, 2012, Macleod Dixon joined Norton Rose Group adding strength and depth in Canada, Latin America and around the world. For more information please visit

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
Norton Rose Fulbright Canada LLP
In association with
Related Topics
Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
Norton Rose Fulbright Canada LLP
Related Articles
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
Email Address
Company Name
Confirm Password
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Media & IT
 Real Estate
 Wealth Mgt
Asia Pacific
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
United States
Worldwide Updates
Registration (you must scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of

To Use you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.


The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.


Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions