Mindel Scott

Fast Track Rules of Court

The due process for disclosure of documents under rule 7-1 applies to expedited litigation. Second, parties to an expedited action are prevented from filing applications (with several exceptions) in court unless a case planning conference has already taken place. A case planning conference is an opportunity for parties to discuss procedural issues in their case before a judge or master, who can then give instructions on the next steps in the litigation. In some cases, the judge or captain may be able to resolve any issues at the case planning conference, avoiding the need for an application and making the litigation process more efficient (as intended). In other cases, however, the problem cannot be resolved and a request may still be required even after attending the case planning conference. In these cases, the expedited procedure rule may well be counterproductive, as it creates an additional hurdle (and additional time and costs) before a party can proceed with its claim. The start of the time limit for a respondent to file pleadings is important because the time limit varies depending on whether the proceeding is “ordinary” (if the respondent has three months after service of the appellant`s submissions) or “expeditious” (if the respondent has one month after receiving the notice of hearing). In view of the decision of the Supreme Court set out above, if the procedure provided for in Article 905 of the Code of Civil Procedure is initiated and the plaintiff has submitted his application before receiving the notice of hearing from the court, the defendant must anticipate this communication and submit his response within one month of service of the plaintiff`s request. It does not matter when the notice of hearing is sent by the Registry of the Court of Appeal.

The expedited procedure rules generally apply to claims of the Supreme Court of British Columbia that fall into one of two categories: While caution is advised when relying on expedited rules to ensure they do not backfire, the B.C. Supreme Court`s expedited rules generally help create a faster and more efficient litigation process for prosecutions. on a smaller scale. Expedited rules can be an excellent tool in unlawful dismissal cases that are too valuable to go to the B.C. Small Claims Court, but not valuable enough to justify the more costly and complex rules that typically apply to the B.C. Supreme Court. The rule is triggered by the filing of an accelerated action announcement on Form 61. Under an expedited procedure, parties cannot submit contested claims without first participating in a case planning conference. Verbal discoveries in accelerated actions are limited (without consent) to two hours combined by all parties in interest. The cost of accelerated actions is capped at $8,000 for one-day trials, $9,500 for two-day tests, and $11,000 for three or more days of trials. More importantly, if a plaintiff receives a judgment of $100,000 (or less) or if a trial is completed in three days (or less), the limited fee provisions apply. This will provide an incentive to ensure that cases that should be in the fast lane are in the fast lane (key features in points 3 and 4).

In its November 2006 report, the BC Justice Review Task Force analyzed the impact of Rule 68 and made a number of recommendations. After several drafts and consultations, it was announced that the new civil and family rules had been adopted and would be fully implemented on 1 July 2010. Part 15, the new expedited procedure rule, combines Rule 68 with Rule 66 “to provide a single simplified and expeditious procedure if the amount in dispute is $100,000 or less, or if the hearing of the claim can be concluded in three days or less” (key features under 3). (5) The Tribunal`s power to determine costs of proceedings is limited under Part 45, Article VI. Developing: Simplified procedures for “economic disputes” were identified as an area for potential reform in the BC Justice Review Task Force`s 2002 Exploring Fundamental Change report, with the analysis of Rule 66, Fast Track Litigation, serving as a basis for discussion. Following this report, the Ministry of the Attorney General and the Supreme Court worked together to examine models of “economic litigation.” (Green Paper, 13) The defendant asks the court to remove the expedited procedure provisions from the case because more than 3 days are needed for the hearing. The arguments were that 18 to 20 witnesses would be needed for the trial. 14 persons were also mentioned in the applicant`s statements, one expert for each party, including factual witnesses. The defendant considered that 14 days was more appropriate for this case.

The Tribunal ordered that the case be withdrawn from rule 15 (1); 1. The court shall send the parties a pre-litigation checklist (list questionnaire) to be completed and returned by the date indicated in the award decision, unless it considers that the application can be included in the trial without the need for a pre-trial checklist. (1) A party must apply to the court if he wishes to change the date set by the court – An application to the court is made by the defendant after the proceedings to claim higher costs in an expedited case, but which are necessary for 7 days for the hearing. For the following reasons, the applicant`s claim for costs is limited to “expedited” costs calculated under rule 15-1(15) and, since the trial lasted seven days, the decision on total costs is $17,000. (Part 27 sets out the procedure for small claims claims.) In this case, the expedited court had ordered the termination of a lease and ordered the eviction of the tenant. The tenant appealed against such a summary decision under the accelerated procedure provided for in Article 905 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Before receiving the notice of hearing from the Nîmes Court of Appeal, the complainant communicated his notice of appeal and his application to the other party. Consequently, the applicant did not repeat that communication after receiving the notice of hearing. On 22 October 2020, the Court of Cassation clarified the rules applicable in cases where the applicant serves his appeal communication and his application before receiving the notice of hearing. Timing: July 2002: Report of the British Columbia Justice Review Task Force released September 2005: Launch of a two-year pilot project November 2006: Publication of effective and affordable civil justice January 2008: Extension of the rule to all provinces December 2008: End of the second consultation on the draft Regulations July 1, 2010: Implementation of new rules replacing Rules 66 and 68 Rule 15-1 is an expedited rule for proceedings that can be heard in three days or less. if the claim is for $100,000 or less, or by consent. It adopts elements of former articles 66 and 68.

Rule 15-1 does not apply to family law proceedings. (Rule 2.11 allows the parties to change a date by written agreement, unless the regulation provides otherwise or the court decides otherwise.) 2. A date fixed by the court or by these Regulations for the execution of an act may not be changed by the parties if the amendment makes it necessary to change one of the dates referred to in subsection (1). This is a hearing at a case planning conference, and the defendant questions whether Rule 15-1 is appropriate, as it will likely take 5 days to hear this matter. The respondent refers to rule 15-1(14), which gives the court the discretion to adjourn the hearing if more than 3 days are required for the hearing. Since the defendant did not make a formal request to the court to delete Rule 15(1), the court was bound by the interpretation of the law and did not withdraw the case from the expedited procedure. (Less learned – you can`t apply for such an order at a case planning conference). Any party to the proceeding may trigger the expedited provisions of rule 15-1 by issuing a Notice of Expedited Action on Form 61. If the case meets the criteria for the expedited procedure, either party can move the case forward on the fast track.

Either party may request that the case be withdrawn from the expedited procedure (or the court may do so itself). Purpose: “[T]he establishment of a single simplified and expeditious procedure if the amount in dispute is $100,000 or less, or if the hearing of the action can be concluded in three days or less” (main characteristics under 3). Description of reforms: Finally, the procedure for determining how much the losing party owes to the winning party is generally simpler in an expedited procedure than in an ordinary trial. When costs are awarded, the Court has a simple formula for calculating costs under the expedited procedure, based simply on the number of hearing days required. The process of calculating costs in common shares is based on a more complex and subjective pricing system. The expedited system often avoids parties arguing over the exact calculation of costs. Rule 15-1 applies to matters that can be heard in 3 days or less, the value is 100,000 or less, or if both parties to the dispute agree. Expedited trials do not apply to family law matters (usually petition-initiated matters), class actions and jury proceedings.

Disputes under Rule 15-1 are initiated by notice of civil claim. In rarer cases, the expedited rules also apply if all parties to the dispute agree or if the court so orders. Fast Track Litigation in BC was created in July 2010 by the Civil Code of the Supreme Court.