- A settlement conference is a required step built into the Small Claims Court process itself.
- Ontario requires a settlement conference in every defended Small Claims Court case because a large share of disputes settle once both sides sit down, hear the other side's position, and…
If you've heard both terms thrown around while dealing with a Small Claims Court case in Ontario, you're not alone in finding them confusing. A settlement conference vs. mediation in Small Claims Court comparison comes up constantly, because the two processes sound similar, share a common goal — resolving disputes without a full trial — and yet work quite differently in practice.
Understanding which one applies to your case, and when, can help you prepare properly and set realistic expectations for what each meeting can actually accomplish.
The Core Difference
A settlement conference is a required step built into the Small Claims Court process itself. Mediation, in the Small Claims context, is generally a separate, voluntary option the parties can choose to pursue — privately or through a program offered outside the mandatory court process — if they want a dedicated attempt at resolution outside the court's own procedural checkpoints.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Settlement Conference | Mediation | |
|---|---|---|
| Mandatory? | Yes — required in every defended Small Claims action | Generally no — voluntary, chosen by the parties |
| Who runs it | A deputy judge or other judicial officer | A neutral third-party mediator, often privately retained |
| Where it happens | As part of the court process, at the courthouse | Can happen anywhere the parties and mediator agree |
| Public or private | Part of the court file, though discussions are treated confidentially | Private and confidential |
| Purpose | Narrow issues, encourage resolution, set the case up for trial if unresolved | Facilitate a negotiated resolution outside the court's timeline |
| Outcome if unresolved | Case proceeds toward trial | Parties return to litigation, or whatever process they were already in |
Why Ontario Built a Mandatory Step Into the Process
Ontario requires a settlement conference in every defended Small Claims Court case because a large share of disputes settle once both sides sit down, hear the other side's position, and get a realistic read from a judicial officer about how the case might unfold. It's a checkpoint built directly into the litigation timeline, not an optional add-on.
Mediation, by contrast, isn't built into the Small Claims process the same way broader mandatory mediation programs apply to some Superior Court of Justice cases in certain regions. Parties in Small Claims Court who want a structured, facilitated negotiation beyond the settlement conference generally have to arrange it themselves.
When Mediation Might Still Make Sense
Even though it isn't required, private mediation can be worth considering in a Small Claims dispute when:
- The relationship between the parties matters beyond this one dispute (neighbours, family members, ongoing business partners)
- The issues are more complex or emotionally charged than a typical debt or contract claim
- Both sides want more time and flexibility than a single scheduled settlement conference allows
- A private, confidential process is preferable to anything becoming part of the court record
Because mediation is voluntary, both sides generally need to agree to pursue it — one party can't force the other into a private mediation process the way the court can require attendance at a settlement conference.
What They Have in Common
- [ ] Both aim to resolve the dispute without a full trial
- [ ] Both involve a neutral third party facilitating discussion
- [ ] Both are generally treated as confidential settlement discussions
- [ ] Neither guarantees resolution — either can end without an agreement
- [ ] Either can lead directly into settlement documents if the parties reach a deal
Frequently asked questions
Do I have to attend both a settlement conference and mediation?
Not necessarily. The settlement conference is required in every defended case; mediation is an additional, optional step some parties choose to pursue on top of it, not a substitute the court requires.
Can the deputy judge at my settlement conference also act as a mediator?
The settlement conference itself is a distinct process run by a deputy judge as part of the court's procedure, rather than a private mediation. If you want a dedicated mediation process, it's generally a separate arrangement outside that conference.
Is anything said during a settlement conference or mediation usable at trial later?
Both processes are generally intended to encourage open, honest discussion, which is why settlement discussions are typically treated as confidential and not directly used against a party at trial. The specifics can matter, though, so it's worth asking a lawyer if you're unsure about a particular statement.
Which one is more likely to actually settle my case?
Both can lead to resolution, and a great deal depends on the parties involved and the nature of the dispute rather than the process itself. Many cases resolve at the mandatory settlement conference alone; others benefit from the extra time and flexibility a separate mediation can offer.
This is a litigation question
Start a file online — flat, published fees, reviewed by a licensed Ontario lawyer before a dollar is owed.