When Can Rule 21 Motions Be Brought Forward
Posted on November 03, 2015
Tuesday, November 3, 2015
Rule 21 motions, governed by Rule 21.01(1) of the Ontario Rules of Civil Procedure, allow a party to seek an early resolution of a legal matter.
Specifically, a party may move before a judge:
21.01 (1) A party may move before a judge,
- (a) For the determination, before trial, of a question of law raised by a pleading in an action where the determination of the question may dispose of all or part of the action, substantially shorten the trial or result in a substantial saving of costs; or
…
and the judge may make an order or grant judgment accordingly.
- (2) No evidence is admissible on a motion,
Under clause (1)(a), except with leave of a judge or on consent of the parties;
Essentially, the purpose of the Rule 21 motions is to allow one of the parties involved in a lawsuit to ask the judge to make an early decision about a specific legal issue before the trial begins. The goal is to save time and money by addressing straightforward legal questions upfront rather than going through a lengthy trial unnecessarily.
When Are Rule 21 Motions Used?
In the law, Rule 21 is a motion that can be brought before the commencement of a civil proceeding, which asks the court to either stay the proceedings – meaning, stop the legal process – or dismiss the claims altogether. There are a number of circumstances where your civil litigation lawyer may use this motion, and it would be permitted, but generally, they hinge on cases that deal with a question of law, not fact, or mixed law and fact. Instead, the law must be clear on the issue at hand for the Rule to apply.
When Can Rule 21 Motions Not Be Used?
A question of law is essentially a matter which can only be addressed by relying on legal instances and powers, such as a judge. A question or issue of fact is an instance that cannot simply be decided by a judge but often requires a jury to adequately assess evidence and witnesses. A question of mixed law and fact is one where the issue at the heart of a case requires both legal powers and knowledge, as well as an assessment of evidence and witnesses, often including a jury or other triers of fact.
Key Limitations of Rule 21
Rule 21 motions are governed by strict guidelines:
- No Evidence Permitted: Under Clause 21.01(1)(a), evidence is generally inadmissible unless the judge grants leave or the parties consent. This ensures that the focus remains on questions of law rather than issues of fact.
- Timing Matters: These motions are intended to be brought before a trial begins, ensuring that questions of law are resolved without delving into evidence or testimony.
What is the Goal of Rule 21?
The aim of Rule 21 is to more efficiently and cost-effectively decide a matter that can otherwise take the parties and the court’s resources when it is needless to do so. A motion under Rule 21 must be brought forward before a trial, with no evidence permitted.
Holgate v. Sheehan Estate, 2015 ONCA 717 and Rule 21
However, there have been cases where the Rule 21 motion was brought during a trial. For example, Holgate v. Sheehan Estate, 2015 ONCA 717 had the trial judge allowing a Rule 21 motion three days into the trial. The case focused on the trust accounts left to Ms. Sheehan following her husband, Mr. Holgate’s, death. Ms. Sheehan was left with two trusts, and following her death, the residue of both trusts was left to Mr. Holgate’s sons from a previous marriage. Ms. Sheehan left her estates to her children from a previous marriage.
Mr. Holgate’s sons felt that the residue of the trusts was lower than it should be and began an action against Mr. Holgate’s and Ms. Sheehan’s respective estates, as well as Ms. Sheehan’s daughter. They asked for an accounting and freezing of funds, as well as damages of $5,000,000. The argument was that Ms. Sheehan went against the terms of the trusts by saving money instead of using it. They argued that Ms. Sheehan converted the trusts into an inheritance or present for her children.
Three days into the trial, after the judge had heard evidence only from the plaintiff and not the defendant, the judge invited both parties to bring one of two motions, one of which was Rule 21, the latter of which was brought forward.
The judge determined that Ms. Sheehan was given a lot of liberty with the trusts and thus was able to accumulate and save income in addition to simply spending the funds.
The Court of Appeal upheld the judge’s decision in this respect, but they did not agree with the procedure used to reach it. Instead, they asserted that there were other avenues by which the trial judge may have proceeded; for example, as the trial had progressed three days, the rest of the testimony and evidence should have been seen before a decision was reached. In addition, a motion for Rule 21 could have been accepted before the beginning of the trial.
This is because evidence is not accepted during a Rule 21 motion, and it is written into the Rule itself. This is because there is a possibility that evidence heard during trial can be improperly used in looking at questions of law and deciding a Rule 21 motion. In this case, the judge only heard and saw evidence from the plaintiffs.
The general Rule of thumb is that Rule 21 motions must only be brought forward before a trial begins, not after.
Reputable Legal Representation with Karrass Law
Rule 21 motions are effective in civil litigation, offering an efficient means to resolve clear questions of law and potentially streamline or conclude legal proceedings. However, they must be used appropriately—before trial and without reliance on evidence—to ensure fairness and adherence to procedural rules.
To learn more about how our reputable and trusted civil litigation lawyers can support your legal needs, contact us today for a complimentary legal consultation.