Written by David Sterns on April 20, 2025<\/p>\n\n\n\n
LITIGATORS\u2014
Did you know the Civil Rules Reform Committee wants plaintiffs to front-end load all their evidence\u2014before any disclosure from the defendant?
This change would dramatically increase the cost, risk, and complexity of litigation for individuals, small businesses, and victims. It will further discourage lawyers from taking on the cases of people who most need access to justice.
Why this model?
<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
#AccessToJustice<\/a> #CivilReform<\/a> #OntarioLaw<\/a> #Litigation<\/a> #FraudVictims<\/a> #RulesOfCivilProcedure<\/a> #JusticeForAll<\/a> <\/p>\n\n\n\n
Because it mirrors commercial arbitration\u2014the preferred dispute resolution tool of Bay Street litigators. Don\u2019t take my word for it. A respected arbitration practitioner says exactly that in this article:
Law.com<\/a>: Fundamental Changes to Civil Procedure Are Coming to Canada\u2019s Largest Court
But surely this was supported by evidence, right?
Here\u2019s what the report itself admits (PDF page 41):
\u201cTo our knowledge, and unsurprisingly, there is no research literature comparing the average cost of a case proceeding from start to finish under our existing model with the average cost of a proceeding from start to finish under the up-front evidence model.\u201d
No data. No empirical comparison. Just untested theory\u2014and a model imported from a legal culture built for corporate litigants, not vulnerable plaintiffs.
Who does this help?
Large corporations looking to discourage claims and drive up litigation costs.
Who does it hurt?
People. Real people.<\/p>\n\n\n\n