Yes No Share to Facebook
Adjudicative Jurisdiction:
The Types of Cases Handled Within Small Claims Court Proceedings
Last Updated: August 27 2026
Question: Can I file my claim in Ontario Small Claims Court if I’m mainly asking for an order or declaration, not damages?
Answer: For Ontario Small Claims Court, Wennekers.Legal™ can help you assess whether your claim fits the Court’s jurisdiction by focusing on what remedy you’re asking for, because the Court hears only actions for the payment of money (up to the prescribed limit) or the recovery of possession of personal property, and requests for declarations or injunction-like remedies generally do not belong there unless they reduce to one of those approved remedies. If you share your facts and the exact orders you want, Wennekers.Legal™ can help you choose the right forum and draft your claim so it stays within the Courts of Justice Act limits under Courts of Justice Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. C.43, s. 23(1) and s. 25. Call (647) 701-1162 for professional legal services in Ontario, including Small Claims Court procedure guidance and next-step advice.
Add this website to Google Preferred Sources
Litigative Subject-Matter Authority
As a specialized branch of the Superior Court of Justice, the Small Claims Court offers an efficient forum for resolving civil disputes involving modest claims. Its jurisdiction over subject matter is carefully prescribed by statute and regulation, which determine both the scope and the limits of the disputes it may hear.
Note: Please contact Wennekers.Legal™ by phone at: (647) 701-1162 to discuss any specific questions that you may have.
The Law
The authority of the Small Claims Court is set out in section 23(1) of the Courts of Justice Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. C.43, which says in simple terms that the Court may only grant remedies for the payment of money or the return of personal property, each within the prescribed monetary limit. Other forms of relief, such as injunctions, declarations, contract rescission, or accountings, are outside its reach and must be pursued in higher court. At the same time, section 25 directs the Small Claims Court to decide “all questions of law and fact” that arise in cases properly before it. This means that as long as the claim is for money or personal property within the limit, the Small Claims Court may hear virtually any cause of action, from breach of contract to negligence and beyond. Put plainly, the Small Claims Court is narrow in remedies but broad in subject matter: it can deal with almost any type of dispute, but only where the requested outcome is money or the return of property within its jurisdiction.
Jurisdiction
23 (1) The Small Claims Court,
(a) has jurisdiction in any action for the payment of money where the amount claimed does not exceed the prescribed amount exclusive of interest and costs; and
(b) has jurisdiction in any action for the recovery of possession of personal property where the value of the property does not exceed the prescribed amount.
...
Summary hearings
25 The Small Claims Court shall hear and determine in a summary way all questions of law and fact and may make such order as is considered just and agreeable to good conscience.
In Maple Ridge Community Management Ltd. v. Peel Condominium Corporation No. 231, 2015 ONCA 520, the Ontario Court of Appeal recognized how important the Small Claims Court is for making justice affordable and accessible. Referring to the Supreme Court’s decision in Hryniak v. Mauldin, [2014] 1 S.C.R. 87, the Court noted that long delays and high costs are major barriers that threaten the rule of law. To address this, the Court explained that the Small Claims Court’s mandate in section 25 of the Courts of Justice Act, to “hear and determine in a summary way all questions of law and fact”, allows disputes over modest claims to be resolved quickly and fairly. With simplified rules and procedures designed to move cases efficiently, the Small Claims Court gives people who might otherwise be priced out of the system a chance to have their rights heard and protected.
[33] The Supreme Court of Canada has recognized that access to justice is a significant and ongoing challenge to the justice system with the potential to threaten the rule of law. In Hryniak v. Mauldin, 2014 SCC 7, [2014] 1 S.C.R. 87, at para. 1, the court held:
Ensuring access to justice is the greatest challenge to the rule of law in Canada today. Trials have become increasingly expensive and protracted. Most Canadians cannot afford to sue when they are wronged or defend themselves when they are sued, and cannot afford to go to trial. Without an effective and accessible means of enforcing rights, the rule of law is threatened. Without public adjudication of civil cases, the development of the common law is stunted.
[34] The Small Claims Court is mandated under s. 25 of the Courts of Justice Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. C.43, to “hear and determine in a summary way all questions of law and fact and may make such order as is considered just and agreeable to good conscience.” The Small Claims Court plays a vital role in the administration of justice in the province by ensuring meaningful and cost effective access to justice for cases involving relatively modest claims for damages. In order to meet its mandate, the Small Claims Court’s process and procedures are designed to ensure that it can handle a large volume of cases in an efficient and economical manner.
In Ontario Deputy Judges Association v. Ontario, 2005 CanLII 42263, the breadth of matters that may arise in the Small Claims Court was noted indirectly. Although the case primarily addressed the role and duties of Deputy Judges, the Superior Court recognized that such judges preside over disputes involving issues as varied as Charter rights, defamation, creditor rights, intellectual property, estate litigation, and medical malpractice. While remedies in the Small Claims Court remain confined to the payment of money or the recovery of personal property, this acknowledgment illustrates the wide spectrum of legal questions that can, and often do, arise before Deputy Judges in the Small Claims Court forum. As the Superior Court observed, the Small Claims Court is the busiest court in Ontario, one that litigants are most likely to encounter, and it frequently deals with increasingly complex legal issues despite the relatively modest financial limits imposed on its jurisdiction.
[18] Deputy judges can hear a wide range of cases and have broad jurisdiction over proceedings involving the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, defamation, creditors' rights, intellectual property claims, estate litigation, and medical malpractice, among others. Deputy judges also exercise a form of equitable jurisdiction, which adds to their role and responsibilities as judicial officers. The Small Claims Court can hear and determine all questions of law and fact and may make orders considered just and agreeable to good conscience.
...
[20] Deputy judges carry out judicial functions for large numbers of litigants contesting significant sums of money. The Small Claims Court is the busiest court in Ontario and the court that citizens are most likely to encounter. Litigants in Small Claims Court are increasingly represented by counsel and contend with increasingly complex legal issues. ...
Conclusion
The subject-matter jurisdiction of the Small Claims Court is both limited and expansive. It is limited in the sense that only certain remedies; namely, the payment of money or the recovery of personal property within the prescribed threshold may be granted. Yet within those boundaries, the adjudicative jurisdiction is expansive, allowing a wide range of legal disputes across many causes of action. This balance reflects the statutory design: to provide a simplified, efficient, and cost-effective forum, for resolving disputes that might otherwise be inaccessible to many litigants. By doing so, the Small Claims Court fulfills an essential role in advancing access to justice while ensuring the rule of law is meaningfully available.
NOTE: A substantial amount of online searches for “lawyers near me” or “best lawyer in” typically indicate a demand for swift and effective legal assistance as opposed to a particular professional designation. In Ontario, the same Law Society that governs lawyers also regulates licensed paralegals, granting them the authority to represent clients in specific litigation cases. Central to this role are advocacy, legal analysis, and procedural expertise. Wennekers.Legal™ provides legal support within its licensed framework, focusing on strategic positioning, evidence preparation, and compelling advocacy aimed at securing efficient and advantageous outcomes for clients.
