Choosing the Proper Forum for Small Claims (20:IV) - Revision history

LSLAP at 19:41, 13 October 2025

2025-10-13T19:41:18Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:41, 13 October 2025
Line 1:		Line 1:
	{{REVIEWED LSLAP \| date= ~~12 August~~ 2025}}		{{REVIEWED LSLAP \| date= 11 July 2025}}
	{{LSLAP Manual TOC\|expanded = smallclaims}}		{{LSLAP Manual TOC\|expanded = smallclaims}}

LSLAP at 15:24, 29 September 2025

2025-09-29T15:24:39Z

LSLAP: /* 2. Process */

2025-09-22T17:30:35Z

2. Process

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:30, 22 September 2025
Line 168:		Line 168:
	In considering a request for permission to be represented by a lawyer or other person, the CRT will consider various factors set under Rule 1.16.		In considering a request for permission to be represented by a lawyer or other person, the CRT will consider various factors set under Rule 1.16.

	All representatives and helpers must comply with the CRT’s Code of Conduct https://civilresolutionbc.ca/wp-content/uploads/CRT-Code-of-Conduct-~~Apr~~-~~2021~~.pdf		All representatives and helpers must comply with the CRT’s Code of Conduct https://civilresolutionbc.ca/wp-content/uploads/CRT-Code-of-Conduct-for-Participants-Aug-2024.pdf

	:'''NOTE:''' Parties may obtain legal assistance and/or advice without submitting a Form, however, their lawyer will not be able to participate directly in the CRT process.		:'''NOTE:''' Parties may obtain legal assistance and/or advice without submitting a Form, however, their lawyer will not be able to participate directly in the CRT process.

LSLAP: /* 2. Process */

2025-09-22T17:29:19Z

2. Process

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:29, 22 September 2025
Line 162:		Line 162:
	=== 2. Process ===		=== 2. Process ===

	Using the tribunal to resolve a dispute within its jurisdiction is mandatory by default. However, if the CRT refuses to resolve a claim it can be brought to another court. A party can also apply to court to be exempted from the CRT. For more information see: https://~~www.~~provincialcourt.bc.ca/~~types~~-of-~~cases~~/small-claims-~~matters~~		Using the tribunal to resolve a dispute within its jurisdiction is mandatory by default. However, if the CRT refuses to resolve a claim it can be brought to another court. A party can also apply to court to be exempted from the CRT. For more information see: https://provincialcourt.bc.ca/navigating-court-case/small-claims/claims-5000

	The tribunal is designed to be more informal, faster, and less expensive than Small Claims Court, and will be conducted primarily using the internet and email. Unlike Small Claims Court, the tribunal generally requires the parties to be self-represented; lawyers are generally not permitted (Civil Resolution Tribunal Act, s 20). There are exceptions to this (see subsections 2 and 3), including where a party is a minor or has impaired capacity, where the rules permit the party to be represented or where the tribunal permits representation because it is in the interests of justice and fairness. If a party wishes to request a representative, they should contact the CRT directly to obtain a Representation Request Form.		The tribunal is designed to be more informal, faster, and less expensive than Small Claims Court, and will be conducted primarily using the internet and email. Unlike Small Claims Court, the tribunal generally requires the parties to be self-represented; lawyers are generally not permitted (Civil Resolution Tribunal Act, s 20). There are exceptions to this (see subsections 2 and 3), including where a party is a minor or has impaired capacity, where the rules permit the party to be represented or where the tribunal permits representation because it is in the interests of justice and fairness. If a party wishes to request a representative, they should contact the CRT directly to obtain a Representation Request Form.

LSLAP: /* e) Non-Consensual Sharing of Intimate Images */

2025-09-22T17:28:25Z

e) Non-Consensual Sharing of Intimate Images

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:28, 22 September 2025
Line 144:		Line 144:
	==== e) Non-Consensual Sharing of Intimate Images ====		==== e) Non-Consensual Sharing of Intimate Images ====

	On January 29, 2024, the ''Intimate Images Protection Act'' (IIPA) came into effect. It applies retroactively to March 6, 2023. The legislation provides applicants with civil remedies from the BC Courts or the CRT in cases where their intimate images have been shared or published without their consent. Under the IIPA, “intimate images” includes visual recordings or visual simultaneous representations of an individual where they are engaging in a sexual act, nude or nearly nude, or exposing their genital organs, anal region or breasts. It does not matter whether or not the image was altered in any way, meaning the IIPA covers deepfakes as well. ~~Applicants making claims against the IIPA~~ to ~~the Civil Resolution Tribunal are limited to claims~~ of up to $5,~~000. However~~, ~~applicants could receive more in court~~.		On January 29, 2024, the ''Intimate Images Protection Act'' (IIPA) came into effect. It applies retroactively to March 6, 2023. The legislation provides applicants with civil remedies from the BC Courts or the CRT in cases where their intimate images have been shared or published without their consent. The IIPA also provides remedies where a person threatens to share an individual’s intimate images. Under the IIPA, “intimate images” includes visual recordings or visual simultaneous representations of an individual where they are engaging in a sexual act, nude or nearly nude, or exposing their genital organs, anal region or breasts. It does not matter whether or not the image was altered in any way, meaning the IIPA covers deepfakes as well. In order for an image to qualify as an “intimate image,” an individual also must have a reasonable expectation of privacy in relation to the image. For example, if an individual posts an image of themself online and then changes their mind, their expectation of privacy may not be reasonable and so IIPA may not apply to the image.

	Applicants will have potential recourse through the IIPA against both individuals who share or threaten to share the applicant’s intimate images non-consensually, as well as against “internet intermediaries”, which are defined as any ~~entitity~~ that hosts online platforms where third party content such as images and videos are hosted and indexed (e.g. social media websites, online forums, online games etc.). Recourse includes civil damages as well as orders to remove, delete or destroy all copies of the applicant’s intimate images that are in another party’s possession or control. Under the IIPA, judge or tribunal decision maker can also order a technology company to stop distribution and remove, delete or de-index an intimate image from its platform. Additionally, under the IIPA, the BC Courts and the CRT can require any person or company to provide any information ~~that~~ that is necessary for the furtherance of the removal, destruction, or de-indexing of the applicant’s intimate images.		Applicants will have potential recourse through the IIPA against both individuals who share or threaten to share the applicant’s intimate images non-consensually, as well as against “internet intermediaries”, which are defined as any entity that hosts online platforms where third party content such as images and videos are hosted and indexed (e.g. social media websites, online forums, online games etc.). Recourse includes civil damages (limited to $5,000 at the CRT) as well as orders to remove, delete or destroy all copies of the applicant’s intimate images that are in another party’s possession or control. Under the IIPA, a judge or tribunal decision maker can also order a technology company to stop distribution and remove, delete or de-index an intimate image from its platform. Additionally, under the IIPA, the BC Courts and the CRT can require any person or company to provide any information that is necessary for the furtherance of the removal, destruction, or de-indexing of the applicant’s intimate images.

	To obtain an order, applicants need to show that the image is an intimate image depicting the applicant, and that another person ~~distributed~~ it without their consent. The applicant who is seeking relief under the IIPA ~~also~~ does not need to provide notice of their application, nor does the applicant need to name a respondent, unless the applicant is seeking damages.		To obtain an order, applicants need to show that the image is an intimate image depicting the applicant, and that another person shared it or threatened to share it without their consent. The applicant who is seeking relief under the IIPA does not need to provide notice of their application, nor does the applicant need to name a respondent or prove that they suffered harm, unless the applicant is seeking damages.

	Individuals and technology companies who are not in non-compliance with these orders can face penalties. Under the ''Intimate Images Protection Regulation'', the penalties for individuals are set at a maximum of $500 for every day that the individual fails to comply with the order. The penalties for internet ~~intermediatiaries~~ are set at $5000 for each day of non-compliance. In both cases, the total maximum in penalties that can be assigned to a party for non-compliance is $100,000.		Individuals and technology companies who are not in non-compliance with these orders can face penalties. Under the ''Intimate Images Protection Regulation'', the penalties for individuals are set at a maximum of $500 for every day that the individual fails to comply with the order. The penalties for internet intermediaries are set at $5000 for each day of non-compliance. In both cases, the total maximum in penalties that can be assigned to a party for non-compliance is $100,000.

	==== f) Authority to Refuse Dispute ====		==== f) Authority to Refuse Dispute ====

LSLAP at 17:24, 22 September 2025

2025-09-22T17:24:21Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:24, 22 September 2025
Line 4:		Line 4:
	There are several options for resolving most civil disputes in British Columbia: Alternative Dispute Resolution, specialised tribunals, Small Claims Court, the Civil Resolution Tribunal and the Supreme Court of British Columbia.		There are several options for resolving most civil disputes in British Columbia: Alternative Dispute Resolution, specialised tribunals, Small Claims Court, the Civil Resolution Tribunal and the Supreme Court of British Columbia.

	Certain claims must be made through administrative tribunals instead of the courts. See, for example, '''Section IV.C: Civil Resolution Tribunal''' for small claims matters under $5,000, including certain types of disputes between ~~roomates~~, certain motor vehicle injury disputes, and strata matters, '''Chapter 6: Human Rights''' for human rights claims proceeding through the Human Rights Tribunal, '''Chapter 7: Workers’ Compensation''' for workers’ compensation claims proceeding through the Workers’ Compensation Board, '''Chapter 8: Employment Insurance''' for EI matters proceeding through the Social Security Tribunal, '''Chapter 9: Employment Law''' for employment law related matters proceeding through the Employment Standards Branch, and '''Chapter 19: Landlord and Tenant Law''' for tenancy matters proceeding through the Residential Tenancy Branch.		Certain claims must be made through administrative tribunals instead of the courts. See, for example, '''Section IV.C: Civil Resolution Tribunal''' for small claims matters under $5,000, including certain types of disputes between roommates, certain motor vehicle injury disputes, and strata matters, '''Chapter 6: Human Rights''' for human rights claims proceeding through the Human Rights Tribunal, '''Chapter 7: Workers’ Compensation''' for workers’ compensation claims proceeding through the Workers’ Compensation Board, '''Chapter 8: Employment Insurance''' for EI matters proceeding through the Social Security Tribunal, '''Chapter 9: Employment Law''' for employment law related matters proceeding through the Employment Standards Branch, and '''Chapter 19: Landlord and Tenant Law''' for tenancy matters proceeding through the Residential Tenancy Branch.

	In order to bring a claim in British Columbia, the court or tribunal must have territorial jurisdiction. If either the subject matter of the claim (e.g., the contract or wrongful act) occurred in British Columbia or the Defendant resides or does business in British Columbia, this may be a sufficient connection for a court or tribunal to assert jurisdiction. It is sometimes unclear whether British Columbia has a sufficient connection to the claim and is the most appropriate forum. If the court’s jurisdiction is not clear, a claimant should obtain legal advice and review applicable case law; see [https://canlii.ca/t/jpkt8 ''Douez v. Facebook, Inc.'', 2022 BCSC 914].		In order to bring a claim in British Columbia, the court or tribunal must have territorial jurisdiction. If either the subject matter of the claim (e.g., the contract or wrongful act) occurred in British Columbia or the Defendant resides or does business in British Columbia, this may be a sufficient connection for a court or tribunal to assert jurisdiction. It is sometimes unclear whether British Columbia has a sufficient connection to the claim and is the most appropriate forum. If the court’s jurisdiction is not clear, a claimant should obtain legal advice and review applicable case law; see [https://canlii.ca/t/jpkt8 ''Douez v. Facebook, Inc.'', 2022 BCSC 914].

Nate Russell: review confirmed 2025

2025-08-28T22:09:47Z

review confirmed 2025

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:09, 28 August 2025
Line 1:		Line 1:
	{{REVIEWED LSLAP \| date= ~~July 31, 2024~~}}		{{REVIEWED LSLAP \| date= 12 August 2025}}
	{{LSLAP Manual TOC\|expanded = smallclaims}}		{{LSLAP Manual TOC\|expanded = smallclaims}}

LSLAP at 20:20, 12 August 2025

2025-08-12T20:20:31Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:20, 12 August 2025
Line 148:		Line 148:
	Applicants will have potential recourse through the IIPA against both individuals who share or threaten to share the applicant’s intimate images non-consensually, as well as against “internet intermediaries”, which are defined as any entitity that hosts online platforms where third party content such as images and videos are hosted and indexed (e.g. social media websites, online forums, online games etc.). Recourse includes civil damages as well as orders to remove, delete or destroy all copies of the applicant’s intimate images that are in another party’s possession or control. Under the IIPA, judge or tribunal decision maker can also order a technology company to stop distribution and remove, delete or de-index an intimate image from its platform. Additionally, under the IIPA, the BC Courts and the CRT can require any person or company to provide any information that that is necessary for the furtherance of the removal, destruction, or de-indexing of the applicant’s intimate images.		Applicants will have potential recourse through the IIPA against both individuals who share or threaten to share the applicant’s intimate images non-consensually, as well as against “internet intermediaries”, which are defined as any entitity that hosts online platforms where third party content such as images and videos are hosted and indexed (e.g. social media websites, online forums, online games etc.). Recourse includes civil damages as well as orders to remove, delete or destroy all copies of the applicant’s intimate images that are in another party’s possession or control. Under the IIPA, judge or tribunal decision maker can also order a technology company to stop distribution and remove, delete or de-index an intimate image from its platform. Additionally, under the IIPA, the BC Courts and the CRT can require any person or company to provide any information that that is necessary for the furtherance of the removal, destruction, or de-indexing of the applicant’s intimate images.

	To obtain an order, applicants need to show that the image is an intimate image depicting the applicant, and that another person distributed it without their consent~~. The applicant is not required to prove that they suffered harm~~. The applicant who is seeking relief under the IIPA also does not need to provide notice of their application, nor does the applicant need to name a respondent, unless the applicant is seeking damages.		To obtain an order, applicants need to show that the image is an intimate image depicting the applicant, and that another person distributed it without their consent. The applicant who is seeking relief under the IIPA also does not need to provide notice of their application, nor does the applicant need to name a respondent, unless the applicant is seeking damages.

	Individuals and technology companies who are not in non-compliance with these orders can face penalties. Under the ''Intimate Images Protection Regulation'', the penalties for individuals are set at a maximum of $500 for every day that the individual fails to comply with the order. The penalties for internet intermediatiaries are set at $5000 for each day of non-compliance. In both cases, the total maximum in penalties that can be assigned to a party for non-compliance is $100,000.		Individuals and technology companies who are not in non-compliance with these orders can face penalties. Under the ''Intimate Images Protection Regulation'', the penalties for individuals are set at a maximum of $500 for every day that the individual fails to comply with the order. The penalties for internet intermediatiaries are set at $5000 for each day of non-compliance. In both cases, the total maximum in penalties that can be assigned to a party for non-compliance is $100,000.

LSLAP at 17:51, 7 August 2024

2024-08-07T17:51:17Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:51, 7 August 2024
Line 1:		Line 1:
	{{REVIEWED LSLAP \| date= ~~June 24~~, ~~2023~~}}		{{REVIEWED LSLAP \| date= July 31, 2024}}
	{{LSLAP Manual TOC\|expanded = smallclaims}}		{{LSLAP Manual TOC\|expanded = smallclaims}}

LSLAP: /* e) Non-Consensual Sharing of Intimate Images */

2024-07-31T23:55:28Z

e) Non-Consensual Sharing of Intimate Images

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:55, 31 July 2024
Line 144:		Line 144:
	==== e) Non-Consensual Sharing of Intimate Images ====		==== e) Non-Consensual Sharing of Intimate Images ====

	On January 29, 2024, the ' 'Intimate Images Protection Act' ' (IIPA) came into effect. It applies retroactively to March 6, 2023. The legislation provides applicants with civil remedies from the BC Courts or the CRT in cases where their intimate images have been shared or published without their consent. Under the IIPA, “intimate images” includes visual recordings or visual simultaneous representations of an individual where they are engaging in a sexual act, nude or nearly nude, or exposing their genital organs, anal region or breasts. It does not matter whether or not the image was altered in any way, meaning the IIPA covers deepfakes as well. Applicants making claims against the IIPA to the Civil Resolution Tribunal are limited to claims of up to $5,000. However, applicants could receive more in court.		On January 29, 2024, the ''Intimate Images Protection Act'' (IIPA) came into effect. It applies retroactively to March 6, 2023. The legislation provides applicants with civil remedies from the BC Courts or the CRT in cases where their intimate images have been shared or published without their consent. Under the IIPA, “intimate images” includes visual recordings or visual simultaneous representations of an individual where they are engaging in a sexual act, nude or nearly nude, or exposing their genital organs, anal region or breasts. It does not matter whether or not the image was altered in any way, meaning the IIPA covers deepfakes as well. Applicants making claims against the IIPA to the Civil Resolution Tribunal are limited to claims of up to $5,000. However, applicants could receive more in court.

	Applicants will have potential recourse through the IIPA against both individuals who share or threaten to share the applicant’s intimate images non-consensually, as well as against “internet intermediaries”, which are defined as any entitity that hosts online platforms where third party content such as images and videos are hosted and indexed (e.g. social media websites, online forums, online games etc.). Recourse includes civil damages as well as orders to remove, delete or destroy all copies of the applicant’s intimate images that are in another party’s possession or control. Under the IIPA, judge or tribunal decision maker can also order a technology company to stop distribution and remove, delete or de-index an intimate image from its platform. Additionally, under the IIPA, the BC Courts and the CRT can require any person or company to provide any information that that is necessary for the furtherance of the removal, destruction, or de-indexing of the applicant’s intimate images.		Applicants will have potential recourse through the IIPA against both individuals who share or threaten to share the applicant’s intimate images non-consensually, as well as against “internet intermediaries”, which are defined as any entitity that hosts online platforms where third party content such as images and videos are hosted and indexed (e.g. social media websites, online forums, online games etc.). Recourse includes civil damages as well as orders to remove, delete or destroy all copies of the applicant’s intimate images that are in another party’s possession or control. Under the IIPA, judge or tribunal decision maker can also order a technology company to stop distribution and remove, delete or de-index an intimate image from its platform. Additionally, under the IIPA, the BC Courts and the CRT can require any person or company to provide any information that that is necessary for the furtherance of the removal, destruction, or de-indexing of the applicant’s intimate images.
Line 150:		Line 150:
	To obtain an order, applicants need to show that the image is an intimate image depicting the applicant, and that another person distributed it without their consent. The applicant is not required to prove that they suffered harm. The applicant who is seeking relief under the IIPA also does not need to provide notice of their application, nor does the applicant need to name a respondent, unless the applicant is seeking damages.		To obtain an order, applicants need to show that the image is an intimate image depicting the applicant, and that another person distributed it without their consent. The applicant is not required to prove that they suffered harm. The applicant who is seeking relief under the IIPA also does not need to provide notice of their application, nor does the applicant need to name a respondent, unless the applicant is seeking damages.

	Individuals and technology companies who are not in non-compliance with these orders can face penalties. Under the "Intimate Images Protection Regulation", the penalties for individuals are set at a maximum of $500 for every day that the individual fails to comply with the order. The penalties for internet intermediatiaries are set at $5000 for each day of non-compliance. In both cases, the total maximum in penalties that can be assigned to a party for non-compliance is $100,000.		Individuals and technology companies who are not in non-compliance with these orders can face penalties. Under the ''Intimate Images Protection Regulation'', the penalties for individuals are set at a maximum of $500 for every day that the individual fails to comply with the order. The penalties for internet intermediatiaries are set at $5000 for each day of non-compliance. In both cases, the total maximum in penalties that can be assigned to a party for non-compliance is $100,000.

	==== f) Authority to Refuse Dispute ====		==== f) Authority to Refuse Dispute ====

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:24, 29 September 2025
Line 6:		Line 6:
	Certain claims must be made through administrative tribunals instead of the courts. See, for example, '''Section IV.C: Civil Resolution Tribunal''' for small claims matters under $5,000, including certain types of disputes between roommates, certain motor vehicle injury disputes, and strata matters, '''Chapter 6: Human Rights''' for human rights claims proceeding through the Human Rights Tribunal, '''Chapter 7: Workers’ Compensation''' for workers’ compensation claims proceeding through the Workers’ Compensation Board, '''Chapter 8: Employment Insurance''' for EI matters proceeding through the Social Security Tribunal, '''Chapter 9: Employment Law''' for employment law related matters proceeding through the Employment Standards Branch, and '''Chapter 19: Landlord and Tenant Law''' for tenancy matters proceeding through the Residential Tenancy Branch.		Certain claims must be made through administrative tribunals instead of the courts. See, for example, '''Section IV.C: Civil Resolution Tribunal''' for small claims matters under $5,000, including certain types of disputes between roommates, certain motor vehicle injury disputes, and strata matters, '''Chapter 6: Human Rights''' for human rights claims proceeding through the Human Rights Tribunal, '''Chapter 7: Workers’ Compensation''' for workers’ compensation claims proceeding through the Workers’ Compensation Board, '''Chapter 8: Employment Insurance''' for EI matters proceeding through the Social Security Tribunal, '''Chapter 9: Employment Law''' for employment law related matters proceeding through the Employment Standards Branch, and '''Chapter 19: Landlord and Tenant Law''' for tenancy matters proceeding through the Residential Tenancy Branch.

	In order to bring a claim in British Columbia, the court or tribunal must have territorial jurisdiction. If either the subject matter of the claim (e.g., the contract or wrongful act) occurred in British Columbia or the Defendant resides or does business in British Columbia, this may be a sufficient connection for a court or tribunal to assert jurisdiction. It is sometimes unclear whether British Columbia has a sufficient connection to the claim and is the most appropriate forum. If the court’s jurisdiction is not clear, a claimant should obtain legal advice and review applicable case law; see [https://canlii.ca/t/jpkt8 ''Douez v. Facebook, Inc.'', 2022 BCSC 914].		In order to bring a claim in British Columbia, the court or tribunal must have territorial jurisdiction. If either the subject matter of the claim (e.g., the contract or wrongful act) occurred in British Columbia or the Defendant resides or does business in British Columbia, this may be a sufficient connection for a court or tribunal to assert jurisdiction. It is sometimes unclear whether British Columbia has a sufficient connection to the claim and is the most appropriate forum. If the court’s jurisdiction is not clear, a claimant should obtain legal advice and review applicable case law; see ''[https://canlii.ca/t/jpkt8 Douez v. Facebook, Inc.]'', 2022 BCSC 914.

	Where the dispute is contractual, the existence of a “forum selection clause” may provide further jurisdictional difficulties. Forum selection clauses require the adjudication of claims in the named jurisdiction. Such clauses will generally be upheld absent a finding of “strong cause” to hear the matter in the jurisdiction of another court; see [http://canlii.ca/t/1r9xl ''Borgstrom v Korean Air Lines Co. Ltd.'', 2007 BCCA 263]; [http://canlii.ca/t/1std6 ''Procon Mining & Tunnelling Ltd. v McNeil'', 2007 BCCA 438]). However, where a “forum selection clause” requires arbitration that would be practically inaccessible for reasons of cost or geography, a court may declare the clause invalid and adjudicate the claim ([http://canlii.ca/t/j8dvf ''Uber Technologies Inc v Heller'', 2020 SCC 16]).		Where the dispute is contractual, the existence of a “forum selection clause” may provide further jurisdictional difficulties. Forum selection clauses require the adjudication of claims in the named jurisdiction. Such clauses will generally be upheld absent a finding of “strong cause” to hear the matter in the jurisdiction of another court; see ''[http://canlii.ca/t/1r9xl Borgstrom v Korean Air Lines Co. Ltd.]'', 2007 BCCA 263; ''[http://canlii.ca/t/1std6 Procon Mining & Tunnelling Ltd. v McNeil]'', 2007 BCCA 438). However, where a “forum selection clause” requires arbitration that would be practically inaccessible for reasons of cost or geography, a court may declare the clause invalid and adjudicate the claim (''[http://canlii.ca/t/j8dvf Uber Technologies Inc v Heller]'', 2020 SCC 16).

	== A. Small Claims Court ==		== A. Small Claims Court ==
Line 22:		Line 22:
	'''As of June 1, 2017, Small Claims Court can award a judgment of up to $35,000'''. A person whose claim exceeds $35,000 may still choose Small Claims Court but must expressly state in the notice of claim or counterclaim that they will abandon the amount necessary to bring their claim or counterclaim within the court’s jurisdiction (SCR, Rules 1(4) and 1(5)). Interest and costs are not included in calculating the $35,000 limit.		'''As of June 1, 2017, Small Claims Court can award a judgment of up to $35,000'''. A person whose claim exceeds $35,000 may still choose Small Claims Court but must expressly state in the notice of claim or counterclaim that they will abandon the amount necessary to bring their claim or counterclaim within the court’s jurisdiction (SCR, Rules 1(4) and 1(5)). Interest and costs are not included in calculating the $35,000 limit.

	A claimant must sue all responsible parties for damages arising from a single event in '''one''' claim; the claimant cannot split claims for damages arising out of a single event into multiple claims in an attempt to circumvent the $35,000 limit. If, however, there are multiple events giving rise to a claim, even if closely related, they may be brought in separate actions ([https://decisions.civilresolutionbc.ca/crt/crtd/en/item/365284/index.do ''De Bayer v. Yang'', 2019 BCCRT 298]). For example, if a contractor issues an invoice for $20,000 at the end of January for work done in January and issues another invoice for $20,000 at the end of February for work done in February and both invoices go unpaid, the contractor may sue on each invoice in a separate claim. Rule 7.1(4) permits certain related claims to be heard together.		A claimant must sue all responsible parties for damages arising from a single event in '''one''' claim; the claimant cannot split claims for damages arising out of a single event into multiple claims in an attempt to circumvent the $35,000 limit. If, however, there are multiple events giving rise to a claim, even if closely related, they may be brought in separate actions (''[https://decisions.civilresolutionbc.ca/crt/crtd/en/item/365284/index.do De Bayer v. Yang]'', 2019 BCCRT 298). For example, if a contractor issues an invoice for $20,000 at the end of January for work done in January and issues another invoice for $20,000 at the end of February for work done in February and both invoices go unpaid, the contractor may sue on each invoice in a separate claim. Rule 7.1(4) permits certain related claims to be heard together.

	Where a defendant has pleaded a set-off (the plaintiff owes the defendant money that should be deducted from their award), contributory negligence (the plaintiff’s negligence also contributed to their loss), or shared liability (there is another party who is also liable for the same action), the court may consider these defences against the full amount of the claimant’s claim provided that the net judgment does not exceed $35,000. This also applies when a set-off forms the basis for a standalone counterclaim. For example, if the claimant proves a $50,000 claim and the defendant establishes a $35,000 set-off, the claimant will have a net judgment of $15,000.		Where a defendant has pleaded a set-off (the plaintiff owes the defendant money that should be deducted from their award), contributory negligence (the plaintiff’s negligence also contributed to their loss), or shared liability (there is another party who is also liable for the same action), the court may consider these defences against the full amount of the claimant’s claim provided that the net judgment does not exceed $35,000. This also applies when a set-off forms the basis for a standalone counterclaim. For example, if the claimant proves a $50,000 claim and the defendant establishes a $35,000 set-off, the claimant will have a net judgment of $15,000.
Line 56:		Line 56:
	* any fees the successful party paid for filing any documents;		* any fees the successful party paid for filing any documents;
	* reasonable amounts the party paid for serving any documents; and		* reasonable amounts the party paid for serving any documents; and
	* any other reasonable charges or expenses that the judge or registrar considers directly related to the conduct of the proceeding ([http://pm.cle.bc.ca/clebc-pm-web/manual/42757/reference/casePopup.do?id=1120 ''Gaudet v Mair'', [1996<nowiki>]</nowiki> BCJ. No. 2547 (QL) (Prov Ct)]; [http://pm.cle.bc.ca/clebc-pm-web/manual/42757/reference/casePopup.do?id=24429 ''Faulkner v. Sellars'' (1998), 9 CCLI (3d) 247 (BC Prov Ct)]; [http://canlii.ca/t/1jpxj ''Johnston v. Morris'', 2004 BCPC 511]).		* any other reasonable charges or expenses that the judge or registrar considers directly related to the conduct of the proceeding (''[http://pm.cle.bc.ca/clebc-pm-web/manual/42757/reference/casePopup.do?id=1120 Gaudet v Mair]'', [1996<nowiki>]</nowiki> BCJ. No. 2547 (QL) (Prov Ct); ''[http://pm.cle.bc.ca/clebc-pm-web/manual/42757/reference/casePopup.do?id=24429 Faulkner v. Sellars]'', (1998) 9 CCLI (3d) 247 (BC Prov Ct); ''[http://canlii.ca/t/1jpxj Johnston v. Morris]'', 2004 BCPC 511).

	Under no circumstances can any party recover any fees paid to a lawyer with respect to the proceeding: s 19(4) of the ''Small Claims Act''; however, reasonable disbursements charged by a lawyer with respect to the proceeding may be awarded to the successful party.		Under no circumstances can any party recover any fees paid to a lawyer with respect to the proceeding: s 19(4) of the ''Small Claims Act''; however, reasonable disbursements charged by a lawyer with respect to the proceeding may be awarded to the successful party.
Line 119:		Line 119:
	The CRT has jurisdiction over most vehicle accident claims in British Columbia. In particular, the CRT can resolve disputes regarding accident benefits, minor injury determinations, fault, damages claims up to $50,000, and entitlement to benefits under the Enhanced Care model.		The CRT has jurisdiction over most vehicle accident claims in British Columbia. In particular, the CRT can resolve disputes regarding accident benefits, minor injury determinations, fault, damages claims up to $50,000, and entitlement to benefits under the Enhanced Care model.

	For more information, consult the CRT's [https://civilresolutionbc.ca/solution-explorer Solution Explorer], Chapter 12: Automobile Insurance (ICBC), Chapter 13: Motor Vehicle Law, and ''[https://decisions.civilresolutionbc.ca/crt/crtd/en/item/521692/index.do Dusdal v. ICBC, 2022 BCCRT 602~~]''~~ which briefly explains recent changes to motor vehicle accident claims.		For more information, consult the CRT's [https://civilresolutionbc.ca/solution-explorer Solution Explorer], Chapter 12: Automobile Insurance (ICBC), Chapter 13: Motor Vehicle Law, and ''[https://decisions.civilresolutionbc.ca/crt/crtd/en/item/521692/index.do Dusdal v. ICBC]'', 2022 BCCRT 602 which briefly explains recent changes to motor vehicle accident claims.

	==== d) Societies and Cooperative Associations ====		==== d) Societies and Cooperative Associations ====