COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO

Page: 24
2. The Types of Cases that are Amenable to Summary Judgment
[40] Speaking generally, and without attempting to be exhaustive, there are three types
of cases that are amenable to summary judgment. The first two types of cases also existed
under the former Rule 20, while the third class of case was added by the amended rule.
[41] The first type of case is where the parties agree that it is appropriate to determine
an action by way of a motion for summary judgment. Rule 20.04(2)(b) permits the parties
to jointly move for summary judgment where they agree “to have all or part of the claim
determined by a summary judgment and the court is satisfied that it is appropriate to
grant summary judgment.” We note, however, that the latter wording – “the court is
satisfied” – affirms that the court maintains its discretion to refuse summary judgment
where the test for summary judgment is not met, notwithstanding the agreement of the
parties.
[42] The second type of case encompasses those claims or defences that are shown to
be without merit. The elimination of these cases from the civil justice system is a longstanding
purpose well served by the summary judgment rule. As stated by the Supreme
Court of Canada in Canada (A.G.) v. Lameman, 2008 SCC 14, [2008] 1 S.C.R. 372, at
para. 10:
The summary judgment rule serves an important purpose in
the civil litigation system. It prevents claims or defences that
have no chance of success from proceeding to trial. Trying
unmeritorious claims imposes a heavy price in terms of time