Small Claims Court Limit Involves Net From Set-Off Upon Sum Assessed | Paladin LLP
Helpful?
Yes No Share to Facebook

Small Claims Court Limit Involves Net From Set-Off Upon Sum Assessed


Question: Does the Small Claims Court Limit Apply to Set-Off Amounts?

Answer: In Ontario’s Small Claims Court, while the maximum award limit is $35,000, a set-off is calculated from the assessed amount, not the award cap. This means the court may assess damages over $35,000 but can only award a net judgment within the limit. As confirmed in 2146100 Ontario Ltd. v. 2052750 Ontario Inc., 2013 ONSC 2483, it is the net judgment, after set-off, that must adhere to the $35,000 limit. Secure your legal standing with a comprehensive consultation. Call today to explore your legal options.


Does the Set-Off Amount in a Small Claims Court Case Take the Court Limit as the Maximum Possible Starting Amount?

In Cases Where A Sum Is Assessed Beyond the Small Claims Court Limit, Any Applicable Set-Off Is Calculated From the Assessed Amount Rather Than From the Court Award Limit; However, the Net Result Must Still Be Within The Court Award Limit.


Understanding the Small Claims Court Jurisdiction to Award Judgment As Net Set-Off Despite An Above Limit Assessment

Small Claims Court Limit Involves Net From Set-Off Upon Sum Assessed In the Small Claims Court, the amount that can be awarded as a Judgment is limited to $35,000, excluding legal costs or interest. This limit is separate from the amount that may be assessed.  Furthermore, in cases where a set-off amount applies, the set-off is calculated from the assessed amount rather than from the award limit.

The Law

The case of 2146100 Ontario Ltd. v. 2052750 Ontario Inc., 2013 ONSC 2483, from when a limit of $25,000 applied to the Small Claims Court, confirms that the Small Claims Court may assess any sum and may apply from that sum, rather than from the court jurisdiction limit, a set-off sum when calculating a net Judgment award. Such principle was explicitly stated where it was said:


[17] In terms of the case at bar, the respondents expressly set out in their defendants' claim that they were owed over $42,000 from the appellants. They limited their ultimate recovery, however, to $25,000. Whether that limit is arrived at through set-off or abandonment of any sum over and above the monetary jurisdiction of the court is immaterial in my view: see Dunbar v. Helicon Properties Ltd., 2006 CanLII 25262 (ON SCDC), [2006] O.J. No. 2992, 2006 CarswellOnt 4580, 213 O.A.C. 296 (Div. Ct.).

[18] The respondents claimed a judgment of $25,000. They were awarded a judgment of $21,538.85. In my view, the process amounted to nothing more than the trial judge starting at $42,633 and making deductions for amounts owed to the plaintiff, to arrive at a net figure within the monetary jurisdiction of the court. This process is logically no different than assessing the value of a contract at $50,000, determining that $30,000 had been paid under the contract, leaving a balance owing of $20,000. There could be no doubt, in those circumstances, that the deputy judge had the jurisdiction to make a finding that the initial value of the contract was an amount in excess of the monetary limit of the court. But at the end of the day, it is the net judgment that matters. Here, the amount awarded was within the monetary jurisdiction of the Small Claims Court and did not exceed the amount claimed in the defendants' claim.

Within the 2146100 case, the Judge assessed slightly more than $42,000 on a counterclaim as brought against the Plaintiff. The Judge also assessed a sum just over $21,000 on the Plaintiff's Claim as owed by the Defendant.  When determining the net Judgment award due, the Judge used the $42,000 assessed amount and applied the $21,000 set-off amount.  Subsequently, upon Appeal, it was argued that the set-off should be calculated from the court jurisdiction limit rather than the assessed amount. The Divisional Court disagreed with the argument and upheld the Judgment from Trial.

Summary Comment

The Small Claims Court monetary jurisdiction limit applies to the amount which the court may award rather than the amount the court may assess.  Furthermore, in cases where a set-off calculation is involved, the set-off is taken from the assessed sum rather than from the Small Claims Court limit.

5

AR, BN, CA+|EN, DT, ES, FA, FR, GU, HE, HI
IT, KO, PA, PT, RU, TA, TL, UK, UR, VI, ZH
Send a Message to: Paladin LLP

NOTE: Do not send confidential details about your case.  Using this website does not establish a legal-representative/client relationship.  Use the website for your introduction with Paladin LLP. 
Privacy Policy & Cookies | Terms of Use Your IP Address is: 216.73.216.164
Paladin LLP

7111 Syntex Drive, 3rd Floor
Mississauga, Ontario,
L5N 8C3

P: (289) 925-1572
E: admin@paladin.legal

Book an Appointment

Hours of Business:

9:00AM – 5:00PM
9:00AM – 5:00PM
9:00AM – 5:00PM
9:00AM – 5:00PM
9:00AM – 5:00PM
Monday:
Tuesday:
Wednesday:
Thursday:
Friday:

By appointment only.  Call for details.
Messages may be left anytime.







Sign
Up

Assistive Controls:  |   |  A A A
Ernie, the AI Bot