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.

In association with
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
Check to state you have read and
agree to our Terms and Conditions

Terms & Conditions and Privacy Statement (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd and as a user you are granted a non-exclusive, revocable license to access the Website under its terms and conditions of use. Your use of the Website constitutes your agreement to the following terms and conditions of use. Mondaq Ltd may terminate your use of the Website if you are in breach of these terms and conditions or if Mondaq Ltd decides to terminate your license of use for whatever reason.

Use of

You may use the Website but are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the content and articles available (the Content). 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 & conditions or with the prior written consent of Mondaq Ltd. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information about’s content, users or contributors in order to offer them any services or products which compete directly or indirectly with Mondaq Ltd’s services and products.


Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the documents and related graphics published on this server for any purpose. All such documents and related graphics are provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers hereby disclaim all warranties and conditions with regard to this information, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. In no event shall Mondaq Ltd 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 or performance of information available from this server.

The documents and related graphics published on this server could include technical inaccuracies or typographical errors. Changes are periodically added to the information herein. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers may make improvements and/or changes in the product(s) and/or the program(s) described herein at any time.


Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including what sort of information you are interested in, for three primary purposes:

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, newsletter alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our information providers who provide information free for your use.

Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) do not sell or provide your details to third parties other than information providers. The reason we provide our information providers with this information is so that they can measure the response their articles are receiving and provide you with information about their products and services.

If you do not want us to provide your name and email address you may opt out by clicking here .

If you do not wish to receive any future announcements of products and services offered by Mondaq by clicking here .

Information Collection and Use

We require site users to register with Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to view the free information on the site. We also collect information from our users at several different points on the websites: this is so that we can customise the sites according to individual usage, provide 'session-aware' functionality, and ensure that content is acquired and developed appropriately. This gives us an overall picture of our user profiles, which in turn shows to our Editorial Contributors the type of person they are reaching by posting articles on Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) – meaning more free content for registered users.

We are only able to provide the material on the Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) site free to site visitors because we can pass on information about the pages that users are viewing and the personal information users provide to us (e.g. email addresses) to reputable contributing firms such as law firms who author those pages. We do not sell or rent information to anyone else other than the authors of those pages, who may change from time to time. Should you wish us not to disclose your details to any of these parties, please tick the box above or tick the box marked "Opt out of Registration Information Disclosure" on the Your Profile page. We and our author organisations may only contact you via email or other means if you allow us to do so. Users can opt out of contact when they register on the site, or send an email to with “no disclosure” in the subject heading

Mondaq News Alerts

In order to receive Mondaq News Alerts, users have to complete a separate registration form. This is a personalised service where users choose regions and topics of interest and we send it only to those users who have requested it. Users can stop receiving these Alerts by going to the Mondaq News Alerts page and deselecting all interest areas. In the same way users can amend their personal preferences to add or remove subject areas.


A cookie is a small text file written to a user’s hard drive that contains an identifying user number. The cookies do not contain any personal information about users. We use the cookie so users do not have to log in every time they use the service and the cookie will automatically expire if you do not visit the Mondaq website (or its affiliate sites) for 12 months. We also use the cookie to personalise a user's experience of the site (for example to show information specific to a user's region). As the Mondaq sites are fully personalised and cookies are essential to its core technology the site will function unpredictably with browsers that do not support cookies - or where cookies are disabled (in these circumstances we advise you to attempt to locate the information you require elsewhere on the web). However if you are concerned about the presence of a Mondaq cookie on your machine you can also choose to expire the cookie immediately (remove it) by selecting the 'Log Off' menu option as the last thing you do when you use the site.

Some of our business partners may use cookies on our site (for example, advertisers). However, we have no access to or control over these cookies and we are not aware of any at present that do so.

Log Files

We use IP addresses to analyse trends, administer the site, track movement, and gather broad demographic information for aggregate use. IP addresses are not linked to personally identifiable information.


This web site contains links to other sites. Please be aware that Mondaq (or its affiliate sites) are not responsible for the privacy practices of such other sites. We encourage our users to be aware when they leave our site and to read the privacy statements of these third party sites. This privacy statement applies solely to information collected by this Web site.

Surveys & Contests

From time-to-time our site requests information from users via surveys or contests. Participation in these surveys or contests is completely voluntary and the user therefore has a choice whether or not to disclose any information requested. Information requested may include contact information (such as name and delivery address), and demographic information (such as postcode, age level). Contact information will be used to notify the winners and award prizes. Survey information will be used for purposes of monitoring or improving the functionality of the site.


If a user elects to use our referral service for informing a friend about our site, we ask them for the friend’s name and email address. Mondaq stores this information and may contact the friend to invite them to register with Mondaq, but they will not be contacted more than once. The friend may contact Mondaq to request the removal of this information from our database.


This website takes every reasonable precaution to protect our users’ information. When users submit sensitive information via the website, your information is protected using firewalls and other security technology. If you have any questions about the security at our website, you can send an email to

Correcting/Updating Personal Information

If a user’s personally identifiable information changes (such as postcode), or if a user no longer desires our service, we will endeavour to provide a way to correct, update or remove that user’s personal data provided to us. This can usually be done at the “Your Profile” page or by sending an email to

Notification of Changes

If we decide to change our Terms & Conditions or Privacy Policy, we will post those changes on our site so our users are always aware of what information we collect, how we use it, and under what circumstances, if any, we disclose it. If at any point we decide to use personally identifiable information in a manner different from that stated at the time it was collected, we will notify users by way of an email. Users will have a choice as to whether or not we use their information in this different manner. We will use information in accordance with the privacy policy under which the information was collected.

How to contact Mondaq

You can contact us with comments or queries at

If for some reason you believe Mondaq Ltd. has not adhered to these principles, please notify us by e-mail at and we will use commercially reasonable efforts to determine and correct the problem promptly.