So far, the e-filing service is only
available to parties who are initiating claims (defendants cannot
respond to a claim online), and only where the claimed amount is
not in dispute. Claims that are eligible for e-filing include those
where there is a contract of $25,000 or less, such as unpaid
invoices, loans, credit card debt and overdue rent. Claims for
amounts in dispute, such as claims related to personal injury,
cannot be filed online at this time.
There are two options to file a claim
'Filing Wizard' guides those unfamiliar with
filing a claim through the process of submitting court documents
and paying court filing fees. This option is helpful for
'Quick File' gives legal professionals and
others who frequently file small claims the option of uploading
already completed forms.
Users must create a "ONe-key ID" to login to the online
service. Within a few days of filing the claim online, the
plaintiff will be emailed the court-issued copy for service.
If a defence is not filed within 20
days of service, the plaintiff can file a Default Judgment form
online. If the defendant does file a defence, the normal small
claims procedures will follow: the court will generate a date for a
settlement conference. Plaintiffs will need to file hard copies of
the claim and affidavit of service at the relevant court office at
least 14 days before the scheduled settlement conference.
The fees charged to file online are the
same as those charged to file in person.
The small claims court e-filing pilot launched in August 2014 at
small claims courts in Brampton, Oshawa, Ottawa and Richmond Hill.
The pilot was expanded to the Toronto small claims court in March
2015. Since the pilot launched, more than 2,000 claims have been
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 Mondaq.com.
Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.
In the recent case of Meehan v. Good, the Ontario Court of Appeal dealt with a situation in which a lawyer was retained to represent a client with respect to the assessment of the accounts of the client's former lawyer.
The recent case of Meehan v Good, 2017 ONCA 103, has some unsettling implications for lawyers, as the case leaves open the possibility of extending a lawyer's duty of care beyond the scope of the written retainer agreement...
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).