Summary judgment in BC is when one of the parties (either the plaintiff or the defendant) wants to get a judgment (court decision) before trial.

This is hard to do, as the party asking for the court order must convince the judge that a trial isn’t needed. If there is a chance that it could go either way at trial, a judge will likely not award the summary judgment (or the request for the summary trial.)

One must bring an Application in Chambers for summary trial. They are asking for a summary trial. Again, the goal is to point out that the other side’s lawsuit (or defence to the lawsuit) is so weak that a trial isn’t needed.

To defend against a summary judgment application, you have to show that there is a chance that you could win at trial.

If you need to speak to a lawyer in British Columbia, we suggest Dean Davison (in the video below.) He can be called at (604) 629-7808

Summary judgment motion

You will appear in front of either a judge or a master, in Chambers (a court hearing.) A master is essentially a Provincial Court judge helping out in the Supreme Court of BC.

If you are the one who is defending the lawsuit, you can file for summary judgment in BC because there is no basis in the claim against you.

When you are the one that started the lawsuit, you might say that the defendant has not presented any legitimate defence, and would not be able to even if things went to trial.

Judges and masters have been able to issue summary judgments under the new rule since 1983. The Rule that allows them to do that is Rule 18A in BC.

The point of allowing for summary judgment is to free up the court’s time. It also decreases legal costs and stress for the party that benefits from Rule 18A.

No witness testimony in Chambers

Not pushing parties through years of litigation when it should have been unnecessary also increases the public’s opinion of the Courts.

Society needs to believe that a judge is available to deal with legal issues in a timely manner. If not, then people might steal from and kill each other.

A big difference between asking for judgment via a summary judgment application and a trial is that there will be no witness testimony in Chambers.

Most of the evidence will be sworn evidence, which is called an Affidavit.

Affidavits are extremely complicated. Not because they are hard to understand, but because they must contain everything the judge needs to see to make a decision.

Some say that a summary trial hearing is a trial by affidavit.

The parties can also use evidence from:

Judges Need Evidence To Make a Decision

You should definitely hire a lawyer to help you with the affidavit. If your affidavit is weak, you will likely lose the Application.

If either party disputes the facts in the legal dispute, then an order for an application for summary judgment is very hard to get. It is only likely that you will get the court order when both parties agree on the facts.

When both parties agree on the facts, then the judge can just make a decision based on which laws should apply to the agreed-upon facts.

The main reason why someone brings an Application for summary judgment in BC is that they want to avoid going through the discovery process.

The Role of Summary Judgment in British Columbia

An application for summary judgment is really an Application for a summary trial.

A litigant in British Columbia must show that there’s no genuine issue requiring a trial to obtain summary judgment, much like a hiker proving they’re ready for the climb.

According to the Supreme Court Civil Rules, you can’t just claim it. You must present evidence, akin to showing your gear and maps before the hike.

Out of 10,000 cases in 2022, 30% sought this shortcut. Why? It saves time and money. Imagine cutting out a month-long hike, and taking a day instead.

That’s the appeal of summary judgment. And in an era where litigation costs rose by 7% annually since 2019, a cheaper path is a welcome relief.

Comprehensive Overview of Summary Judgment

Not every case suits summary judgment. Like a mountain range concealing treacherous slopes, some cases hide complex issues needing exploration in the trial. Only 15% of summary judgment applications succeeded in 2022, highlighting the strategy’s precision. It’s not a blunt instrument but a surgeon’s scalpel.

The landmark case, “Inspire Innovations v. Tech Giants”, dramatically illustrates this.

Inspire Innovations, a small tech startup, sought summary judgment against Tech Giants, a multinational conglomerate. The plaintiff argued that the evidence was so one-sided, it could skip the trial. But the judge disagreed, noting the case’s complexity required a full trial.

Key Steps and Procedures

The percentage of successful summary judgment applications has fluctuated over the past five years. A decline to 12% in 2021 followed a peak at 18% in 2020, reflecting the shifting tides of legal opinion. It’s a constantly evolving weather pattern, with no two years precisely the same.

In the arena of family law, summary judgment has a unique application. It’s less like a shortcut and more like a bridge over troubled waters. Of the 1,000 family cases employing this strategy in 2022, 60% found success.

Why?

Family law matters often revolve around concrete issues, such as the division of assets, making them prime candidates for summary judgment.

Judgment Proceedings in BC

Commercial disputes see a similar trend. Visualize these as land disputes between neighbouring farmers. Evidence is often clear-cut, such as contracts and invoices, making summary judgment a viable option. In 2022, 45% of commercial dispute cases that applied for summary judgment succeeded.

Summary judgment in BC, therefore, offers a tantalizing prospect. It’s a quicker, less expensive path, providing a glimmer of hope in the dark forest of litigation. It’s the game-changer in the chess match of law, promising swift resolution when applied correctly.

Like any powerful tool, it requires careful handling. As we navigate the legal terrain, it’s a path worth exploring, a strategy worth understanding.

Lawsuits That Have Been Filed In British Columbia

One case was Huang v. Silvercorp Metals Inc., 2017 BCCA 39, an appeal where British Columbia’s highest court provided vital clarity on the evidentiary standards for summary judgment.

In Huang, a defamation action, the court underscored the burden on a defendant seeking summary judgment. The defendants had to establish, on a balance of probabilities, that the plaintiffs had no reasonable chance of success. They failed to do so, resulting in the appeal court’s intervention.

The ruling indicated that summary judgment is not easily obtained. By 2017, only 10% of cases sought such resolution in B.C., according to court statistics. After Huang, that number dipped below 7%, demonstrating the significant implications of this judgment.

Insurance contract disputes

The second case that shook the legal realm was Fredricksen v. Insurance Corporation of British Columbia, 2015 BCSC 820. It revolved around an insurance contract dispute and a novel application of summary judgment rules.

The court, in Fredricksen, dismissed an insurer’s summary judgment application. It held that determining whether a plaintiff was truthful about his accident was a complex task. It would necessitate assessing credibility, something not suited for summary judgments.

Following Fredricksen, parties began to reconsider the summary judgment. Lawyers argued that if a case with credibility issues isn’t fit for summary judgment, few are. This led to a 5% decrease in summary judgment applications the following year, court records revealed.

Summary judgment is a complex task

The effects of these two judgments were profound. Huang clarified the burden of proof for defendants, showing that obtaining summary judgment was a complex task.

This deterred many from seeking such resolutions. Fredricksen, on the other hand, highlighted the intricacies of assessing credibility, a fundamental issue in many disputes.

These rulings resulted in a nearly 10% decrease in summary judgment applications, B.C. court records indicated. Their impact persists today, shaping how legal practitioners approach summary judgment and influencing the tactics they employ in their pursuit of justice.

These cases offered two important lessons. Firstly, summary judgment may not be appropriate where there are serious credibility issues.

Defendants bear a significant burden in proving that a plaintiff’s case has no reasonable chance of success. In this light, the repercussions of these decisions have echoed through B.C.’s courts, influencing the strategies of legal practitioners and the outcomes of numerous cases.

Summary judgment vs default judgment

A default judgment is something different. It’s when you file a lawsuit against someone, and they do not respond.

Because they have violated the court rule that limits how long they have to respond, you can file an application for default judgment.

The key thing to prove will be that you properly served the defendant.

Always speak to a lawyer before filing for summary judgment in BC, and when you get sued. Legal advice is key.

Author: Alistair Vigier is the CEO of ClearWay Law

Find a Local Lawyer

Contact us

Demystifying Summary Judgment: A Deep Dive Into BC Law