Case Management – Litigation #7

Rule 77 of the Rules of Civil Procedure establishes the framework for case management in Ontario, applying to actions and applications commenced in or transferred to specific regions, namely:

1. City of Toronto
2. City of Ottawa
3. County of Essex

The rule’s application is contingent upon an order assigning the proceeding to case management, which can occur with or without the consent of the parties involved, subject to court approval.

Notably, certain proceedings are exempt from Rule 77, including those placed on the Commercial List, estates matters under Rules 74, 74.1, and 75, applications under the Trustee Act, and actions under the Simplified Procedure (Rule 76), among others.

The initiation of case management under Rule 77 can occur through different avenues:​

• On Consent
  • If all parties consent and the court deems it appropriate, a proceeding may be assigned to case management. This collaborative approach facilitates a more tailored management of the case.
• Without Consent
  • In the absence of unanimous consent, a party may request assignment to case management. However, such an assignment requires approval from a judge or case management master and is less commonly imposed without mutual agreement.

When considering whether to assign a proceeding to case management, the court evaluates various factors, including:​

• The complexity of factual or legal issues​
• The public importance of the issues at hand​
• The number and representation status of parties involved​
• The existence of multiple proceedings with similar parties or causes of action
• The anticipated degree of court intervention required​
• The time necessary for discovery and trial preparation
• The number of expert and other witnesses​
• The expected duration of the trial or hearing​
• Any substantial delays in the proceeding’s conduct

A case management judge or master possesses specific powers under Rule 77.04, including:​

• extending or abridging prescribed timelines
• adjourning case conferences
• setting aside orders made by the registrar
• establishing or amending timetables
• making orders, imposing terms, giving directions, and awarding costs as necessary to fulfill the rule’s purpose

Additionally, the judge or master may, on their initiative, require parties to appear or participate in conferences to address matters arising in connection with case management, including non-compliance with rules.​

Case management encompasses various procedural tools to facilitate the orderly progression of proceedings:​

• Case Conferences
  • Convened at any time by a judge or case management master, these conferences aim to identify contested issues, explore resolution methods, secure agreements on schedules, and establish or amend timetables. Lawyers attending must have the authority to make decisions and be fully acquainted with the case details.​
• Trial Management Conferences
  • Held after setting a trial date, these conferences involve discussing witness lists, exploring admissions to streamline evidence, considering alternative evidence presentation methods, and giving directions to ensure an efficient trial process.

Adherence to established timetables is crucial in case management.

• Parties may, by written agreement, amend a timetable unless expressly prohibited by court order.
• However, such amendments cannot alter the date by which the action must be set down for trial.
• Failure to comply with a timetable may result in the court imposing sanctions, including staying the proceeding, dismissing it, striking out a defence, or issuing other just orders.​