- Summary judgment is a motion, decided by a judge based on affidavit evidence, documents, and legal argument — not a mini-trial with witnesses testifying live in most cases.
- Either side can move for summary judgment.
- The moving party puts together a motion record — affidavit evidence, relevant documents, and written argument — setting out why there's no genuine issue requiring a trial.
Not every lawsuit needs a trial to reach a fair result. When the facts that actually matter aren't genuinely in dispute, Ontario's civil courts allow a party to ask for summary judgment — a decision based on the written record, without live witnesses or a full trial.
Used well, summary judgment can save both sides years and a significant amount in legal costs. Used carelessly, it can waste money on a motion that was never going to succeed. Here's how the process actually works.
What Summary Judgment Is — and Isn't
Summary judgment is a motion, decided by a judge based on affidavit evidence, documents, and legal argument — not a mini-trial with witnesses testifying live in most cases. The general question the court asks is whether there's a genuine issue requiring a trial for a fair resolution of the claim or defence.
It isn't a shortcut around a real factual dispute. If the outcome genuinely depends on whose version of events is more believable, or requires the kind of evidence that only comes out through live testimony and cross-examination, summary judgment usually isn't the right tool — the matter needs to go to trial.
Who Can Bring the Motion
Either side can move for summary judgment. A plaintiff might bring one when the defendant's stated defence doesn't hold up once the evidence is examined. A defendant might bring one to end a claim that has no real chance of success, without having to go through a full trial to get there.
How the Process Generally Works
- The moving party puts together a motion record — affidavit evidence, relevant documents, and written argument — setting out why there's no genuine issue requiring a trial.
- The responding party has to respond with actual evidence of their own, not simply a denial or a promise that better evidence will turn up at trial. Courts expect each side to "put its best foot forward" at this stage.
- The motion is argued before a judge, usually without live witnesses.
- The judge decides based on the record before them.
Possible Outcomes
| Outcome | What it means |
|---|---|
| Motion granted in full | The claim, or defence, is decided without a trial, subject to any appeal |
| Motion granted in part | Some issues are decided; the rest proceeds toward trial |
| Motion dismissed | The case proceeds to trial in the ordinary way |
| A narrower procedure is ordered | The judge may direct a limited process to resolve one specific factual dispute, short of a full trial |
Why These Motions Carry Real Risk
A summary judgment motion isn't free, procedurally or financially. Preparing a full evidentiary record takes real time and expense, and because Ontario's costs rules generally require the unsuccessful party to contribute to the other side's costs, a motion that fails can leave the losing party paying twice — once for their own motion, and again toward the other side's. Parties considering summary judgment should weigh the strength of their record honestly before committing to the motion.
Frequently asked questions
Does bringing a summary judgment motion delay the trial date?
It can. Preparing, arguing, and waiting for a decision on the motion takes time, and if it's dismissed, the case then continues toward trial as though the motion had added a detour. Parties should weigh that delay against the chance the motion succeeds.
Is summary judgment available in Small Claims Court?
Small Claims Court operates under its own simplified rules, which are different from the ordinary Superior Court process this kind of motion typically involves. Whether an equivalent tool applies to your specific claim is worth confirming with a lawyer familiar with that court's procedure.
What's the difference between summary judgment and a motion to strike a claim?
A motion to strike generally attacks the legal sufficiency of the pleading itself — whether it discloses a valid claim at all — while summary judgment looks at the actual evidence to see whether there's a genuine issue requiring a trial. They serve different purposes at different stages.
If my summary judgment motion is only partly successful, is that a win?
It can still be worthwhile — resolving even part of a claim without a trial can narrow the issues, reduce costs, and put pressure toward settling what remains. But it also means the case isn't fully over, and further proceedings on the remaining issues will still be needed.
This is a litigation question
Start a file online — flat, published fees, reviewed by a licensed Ontario lawyer before a dollar is owed.