Responding to a Small Claim (20:VI) - Revision history

LSLAP at 19:41, 13 October 2025

2025-10-13T19:41:26Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:41, 13 October 2025
Line 1:		Line 1:
	{{REVIEWED LSLAP \| date= July ~~31, 2024~~}}		{{REVIEWED LSLAP \| date= 11 July 2025}}
	{{LSLAP Manual TOC\|expanded = smallclaims}}		{{LSLAP Manual TOC\|expanded = smallclaims}}
	If a party is responding to a claim over $5,000, proceed to '''Section VI.B.: Possible Strategies'''.		If a party is responding to a claim over $5,000, proceed to '''Section VI.B.: Possible Strategies'''.

LSLAP at 15:28, 29 September 2025

2025-09-29T15:28:48Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:28, 29 September 2025
Line 49:		Line 49:
	A counterclaim is made on the Reply form by following the instructions and paying the required fee. The fee for a counterclaim is the same as the fee for a Notice of Claim and is eligible for a fee waiver. For more information about making a counterclaim, refer to Guide #2 - Making a claim for proceedings initiated in small claims court (https://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/justice/courthouse-services/small-claims/how-to-guides/making-a-claim) and Guide #3 - Making a claim for proceedings previously initiated before Civil Resolution Tribunal (https://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/justice/courthouse-services/small-claims/how-to-guides/making-a-claim-crt).		A counterclaim is made on the Reply form by following the instructions and paying the required fee. The fee for a counterclaim is the same as the fee for a Notice of Claim and is eligible for a fee waiver. For more information about making a counterclaim, refer to Guide #2 - Making a claim for proceedings initiated in small claims court (https://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/justice/courthouse-services/small-claims/how-to-guides/making-a-claim) and Guide #3 - Making a claim for proceedings previously initiated before Civil Resolution Tribunal (https://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/justice/courthouse-services/small-claims/how-to-guides/making-a-claim-crt).

	The relationship between a counterclaim and a set-off should be noted. A counterclaim is a standalone claim and it is possible for a defendant to succeed on a counterclaim even when the claimant has been unsuccessful on the primary claim. A set-off, on the other hand, is a defence. If the defendant is successful, a set-off will reduce the amount payable to the claimant. In other words, the amount that the defendant claims the claimant owes them is subtracted from any damages claimed by the claimant. If the claimant is unsuccessful, the set-off defence does not apply; the defendant is not awarded the amount of the set-off. For more information about set-offs see: [https://canlii.ca/t/27vgj Jamieson v. Loureiro, 2010 BCCA 52].		The relationship between a counterclaim and a set-off should be noted. A counterclaim is a standalone claim and it is possible for a defendant to succeed on a counterclaim even when the claimant has been unsuccessful on the primary claim. A set-off, on the other hand, is a defence. If the defendant is successful, a set-off will reduce the amount payable to the claimant. In other words, the amount that the defendant claims the claimant owes them is subtracted from any damages claimed by the claimant. If the claimant is unsuccessful, the set-off defence does not apply; the defendant is not awarded the amount of the set-off. For more information about set-offs see: ''[https://canlii.ca/t/27vgj Jamieson v. Loureiro]'', 2010 BCCA 52.

	==== a) Filing and Service ====		==== a) Filing and Service ====
Line 130:		Line 130:
	==== c) Criminality ====		==== c) Criminality ====

	Where a claimant stands to profit from criminal behaviour or compensation would amount to an avoidance or disavowal of a criminal sanction, the claimant cannot recover damages ([http://canlii.ca/t/1fs4g ''Hall v Hebert'', [1993<nowiki>]</nowiki> 2 SCR 159]; [http://canlii.ca/t/1vmgv ''British Columbia v Zastowny'', [2008<nowiki>]</nowiki> 1 SCR 27]). This is narrowly construed and a claimant should read [http://canlii.ca/t/1vmgv ''Hall v Hebert''] before relying upon it.		Where a claimant stands to profit from criminal behaviour or compensation would amount to an avoidance or disavowal of a criminal sanction, the claimant cannot recover damages (''[http://canlii.ca/t/1fs4g Hall v Hebert]'', [1993<nowiki>]</nowiki> 2 SCR 159; ''[http://canlii.ca/t/1vmgv British Columbia v Zastowny]'', [2008<nowiki>]</nowiki> 1 SCR 27). This is narrowly construed and a claimant should read ''[http://canlii.ca/t/1vmgv Hall v Hebert]'' before relying upon it.

	==== d) Inevitable Accident ====		==== d) Inevitable Accident ====

	If the defendant can show that the accident could not have been prevented even if the defendant had exercised reasonable care, the defendant cannot be liable ([http://canlii.ca/t/1tvmf ''Rintoul v X-Ray and Radium Industries Ltd.'', [1956<nowiki>]</nowiki> SCR 674)]. For this defence to apply, the defendant must have had no control over whatever occurred and its effect could not have been avoided even with the best effort and skill.		If the defendant can show that the accident could not have been prevented even if the defendant had exercised reasonable care, the defendant cannot be liable (''[http://canlii.ca/t/1tvmf Rintoul v X-Ray and Radium Industries Ltd.]'', [1956<nowiki>]</nowiki> SCR 674). For this defence to apply, the defendant must have had no control over whatever occurred and its effect could not have been avoided even with the best effort and skill.

	==== e) Illegality ====		==== e) Illegality ====
Line 142:		Line 142:
	==== f) Self Defence ====		==== f) Self Defence ====

	If the defendant honestly and reasonably believed that an assault or battery was imminent and used reasonable force to repel or prevent the assault or battery, the defendant may not be liable for any injuries or damage suffered by the claimant as a result ([http://canlii.ca/t/1fsx3 ''R. v Lavallee'', [1990<nowiki>]</nowiki> 1 SCR 852]; [http://canlii.ca/t/gwf9z ''Wackett v Calder'', [1965<nowiki>]</nowiki> 51 D.L.R. (2d) 598]; ''Brown v Wilson,'' [1975] BCJ No. 1177; ''R v Beckford'', [1987] All ER 425).		If the defendant honestly and reasonably believed that an assault or battery was imminent and used reasonable force to repel or prevent the assault or battery, the defendant may not be liable for any injuries or damage suffered by the claimant as a result (''[http://canlii.ca/t/1fsx3 R. v Lavallee]'', [1990<nowiki>]</nowiki> 1 SCR 852; ''[http://canlii.ca/t/gwf9z Wackett v Calder]'', [1965<nowiki>]</nowiki> 51 D.L.R. (2d) 598; ''Brown v Wilson,'' [1975] BCJ No. 1177; ''R v Beckford'', [1987] All ER 425).

	==== g) Defence of Third Parties ====		==== g) Defence of Third Parties ====

	The same general rules apply as for self-defence provided that the use of force is reasonable ([http://canlii.ca/t/g1905 ''Gambriell v Caparelli'', [1974<nowiki>]</nowiki> 54 D.L.R. (3d) 661]).		The same general rules apply as for self-defence provided that the use of force is reasonable (''[http://canlii.ca/t/g1905 Gambriell v Caparelli]'', [1974<nowiki>]</nowiki> 54 D.L.R. (3d) 661).

	==== h) Mitigation ====		==== h) Mitigation ====

LSLAP at 17:51, 7 August 2024

2024-08-07T17:51:36Z

← 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}}
	If a party is responding to a claim over $5,000, proceed to '''Section VI.B.: Possible Strategies'''.		If a party is responding to a claim over $5,000, proceed to '''Section VI.B.: Possible Strategies'''.

Clicklaw Editor at 18:23, 19 September 2023

2023-09-19T18:23:21Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:23, 19 September 2023
Line 1:		Line 1:
	{{REVIEWED LSLAP \| date= ~~September 8~~, 2023}}		{{REVIEWED LSLAP \| date= June 24, 2023}}
	{{LSLAP Manual TOC\|expanded = smallclaims}}		{{LSLAP Manual TOC\|expanded = smallclaims}}
	If a party is responding to a claim over $5,000, proceed to '''Section VI.B.: Possible Strategies'''.		If a party is responding to a claim over $5,000, proceed to '''Section VI.B.: Possible Strategies'''.
Line 162:		Line 162:


	{{LSLAP Manual Navbox\|type=chapters15-22}}		{{LSLAP Manual Navbox\|type=chapters15-23}}

LSLAP at 20:52, 8 September 2023

2023-09-08T20:52:27Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:52, 8 September 2023
Line 1:		Line 1:
	{{REVIEWED LSLAP \| date= ~~June 24~~, ~~2022~~}}		{{REVIEWED LSLAP \| date= September 8, 2023}}
	{{LSLAP Manual TOC\|expanded = smallclaims}}		{{LSLAP Manual TOC\|expanded = smallclaims}}
	If a party is responding to a claim over $5,000, proceed to '''Section VI.B.: Possible Strategies'''.		If a party is responding to a claim over $5,000, proceed to '''Section VI.B.: Possible Strategies'''.

LSLAP: added paragraph explaining admissions of fact under 2. Apologising

2023-09-08T20:49:05Z

added paragraph explaining admissions of fact under 2. Apologising

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:49, 8 September 2023
Line 21:		Line 21:
	:'''Note''': It is important to contact the insurer as soon as possible and to not make any admissions that might jeopardize a defence. Failing to promptly notify the insurer, admitting liability, or taking steps in the claim may permit the insurer to deny coverage.		:'''Note''': It is important to contact the insurer as soon as possible and to not make any admissions that might jeopardize a defence. Failing to promptly notify the insurer, admitting liability, or taking steps in the claim may permit the insurer to deny coverage.

	=== 2. ~~Apologizing~~ ===		=== 2. Apologising ===

	Many lawsuits arise or continue because a wrongdoer has not apologized to the party who was wronged. In BC, a person may apologize for a wrongful act or failure to act without the apology becoming an admission of liability (''Apology Act'', SBC 2006, c 19, 2(1) and (2)). A sincere apology can often avert litigation or form an important foundation for a settlement.		Many lawsuits arise or continue because a wrongdoer has not apologized to the party who was wronged. In BC, a person may apologize for a wrongful act or failure to act without the apology becoming an admission of liability (''Apology Act'', SBC 2006, c 19, 2(1) and (2)). A sincere apology can often avert litigation or form an important foundation for a settlement. Under the act, such an apology may include words that admit or imply an admission of fault.

			'''Admissions of fact''': however, at common law, the courts and CRT have drawn a distinction between apologies covered by the the ''Apology Act'', (admissions of fault or liability) and those that include admissions of fact. The courts have found that factual admissions (“''I am sorry, I was looking at my phone while driving''”) can be considered by decision makers. Explanatory statements that accompany apologies such as “ ''I was in a hurry''” or “''I was angry''” go beyond admissions of fault excluded by the ''Apology Act'' and may be accepted into evidence (''Schnipper v. Nadeau'', 2022 BCCRT 173)

	=== 3. Option to Pay all or Part ===		=== 3. Option to Pay all or Part ===

Clicklaw Editor: /* f) Self Defence */

2022-11-22T22:50:25Z

f) Self Defence

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:50, 22 November 2022
Line 140:		Line 140:
	==== f) Self Defence ====		==== f) Self Defence ====

	If the defendant honestly and reasonably believed that an assault or battery was imminent and used reasonable force to repel or prevent the assault or battery, the defendant may not be liable for any injuries or damage suffered by the claimant as a result ([http://canlii.ca/t/1fsx3 ''R. v Lavallee'', [1990<nowiki>]</nowiki> 1 SCR 852]; [http://canlii.ca/t/gwf9z ''Wackett v Calder'', [1965<nowiki>]</nowiki> 51 D.L.R. (2d) 598]; ~~[http://canlii.ca/t/gwf9z [~~''Brown v Wilson,'' [1975~~<nowiki>~~]~~</nowiki>~~ BCJ No. 1177]; ''R v Beckford'', [1987] All ER 425).		If the defendant honestly and reasonably believed that an assault or battery was imminent and used reasonable force to repel or prevent the assault or battery, the defendant may not be liable for any injuries or damage suffered by the claimant as a result ([http://canlii.ca/t/1fsx3 ''R. v Lavallee'', [1990<nowiki>]</nowiki> 1 SCR 852]; [http://canlii.ca/t/gwf9z ''Wackett v Calder'', [1965<nowiki>]</nowiki> 51 D.L.R. (2d) 598]; ''Brown v Wilson,'' [1975] BCJ No. 1177; ''R v Beckford'', [1987] All ER 425).

	==== g) Defence of Third Parties ====		==== g) Defence of Third Parties ====

Clicklaw Editor: /* f) Self Defence */

2022-11-22T22:47:16Z

f) Self Defence

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:47, 22 November 2022
Line 140:		Line 140:
	==== f) Self Defence ====		==== f) Self Defence ====

	If the defendant honestly and reasonably believed that an assault or battery was imminent and used reasonable force to repel or prevent the assault or battery, the defendant may not be liable for any injuries or damage suffered by the claimant as a result ([http://canlii.ca/t/1fsx3 ''R. v Lavallee'', [1990<nowiki>]</nowiki> 1 SCR 852]; [http://canlii.ca/t/gwf9z ''Wackett v Calder'', [1965<nowiki>]</nowiki> 51 D.L.R. (2d) 598]; [http://canlii.ca/t/gwf9z ''Brown v Wilson,'' [1975<nowiki>]</nowiki> BCJ No. 1177]; ''R v Beckford'', [1987] All ER 425).		If the defendant honestly and reasonably believed that an assault or battery was imminent and used reasonable force to repel or prevent the assault or battery, the defendant may not be liable for any injuries or damage suffered by the claimant as a result ([http://canlii.ca/t/1fsx3 ''R. v Lavallee'', [1990<nowiki>]</nowiki> 1 SCR 852]; [http://canlii.ca/t/gwf9z ''Wackett v Calder'', [1965<nowiki>]</nowiki> 51 D.L.R. (2d) 598]; [http://canlii.ca/t/gwf9z [''Brown v Wilson,'' [1975<nowiki>]</nowiki> BCJ No. 1177]; ''R v Beckford'', [1987] All ER 425).

	==== g) Defence of Third Parties ====		==== g) Defence of Third Parties ====

Clicklaw Editor: /* f) Self Defence */

2022-11-22T22:43:58Z

f) Self Defence

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:43, 22 November 2022
Line 140:		Line 140:
	==== f) Self Defence ====		==== f) Self Defence ====

	If the defendant honestly and reasonably believed that an assault or battery was imminent and used reasonable force to repel or prevent the assault or battery, the defendant may not be liable for any injuries or damage suffered by the claimant as a result ([http://canlii.ca/t/1fsx3 ''R. v Lavallee'', [1990<nowiki>]</nowiki> 1 SCR 852]; [http://canlii.ca/t/gwf9z ''Wackett v Calder'', [1965<nowiki>]</nowiki> 51 D.L.R. (2d) 598]; [http://canlii.ca/t/gwf9z ~~[http://canlii.ca/t/gwh0b~~ ''Brown v Wilson,'' [1975<nowiki>]</nowiki> BCJ No. 1177]; ''R v Beckford'', [1987] All ER 425).		If the defendant honestly and reasonably believed that an assault or battery was imminent and used reasonable force to repel or prevent the assault or battery, the defendant may not be liable for any injuries or damage suffered by the claimant as a result ([http://canlii.ca/t/1fsx3 ''R. v Lavallee'', [1990<nowiki>]</nowiki> 1 SCR 852]; [http://canlii.ca/t/gwf9z ''Wackett v Calder'', [1965<nowiki>]</nowiki> 51 D.L.R. (2d) 598]; [http://canlii.ca/t/gwf9z ''Brown v Wilson,'' [1975<nowiki>]</nowiki> BCJ No. 1177]; ''R v Beckford'', [1987] All ER 425).

	==== g) Defence of Third Parties ====		==== g) Defence of Third Parties ====

Clicklaw Editor: /* c) Adding a Third Party through the Civil Resolution Tribunal */

2022-11-22T22:40:58Z

c) Adding a Third Party through the Civil Resolution Tribunal

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:40, 22 November 2022
Line 91:		Line 91:

	A respondent who believes another person is responsible for a claim can request resolution of the claim against that other person, often referred to as a “third party claim” by:		A respondent who believes another person is responsible for a claim can request resolution of the claim against that other person, often referred to as a “third party claim” by:
	*indicating in a completed Dispute Response Form that the respondent will apply for dispute resolution against the other person,		:(i) indicating in a completed Dispute Response Form that the respondent will apply for dispute resolution against the other person,
	*completing an Additional Claim Form identifying the other person and describing any claims against that person,		:(ii) completing an Additional Claim Form identifying the other person and describing any claims against that person,
	*providing the Additional Claim Form to the tribunal, and		:(iii) providing the Additional Claim Form to the tribunal, and
	*paying the required fee to add a claim (see ~~'''~~Appendix I: Civil Resolution Tribunal Fees~~'''~~).		:(iv) paying the required fee to add a claim (see [[Civil_Resolution_Tribunal_Fees_(20:App_I)\|Appendix I: Civil Resolution Tribunal Fees]]).

	A respondent who adds an additional party to a claim must complete the steps for applying for CRT Dispute Resolution, except the time frame for providing notice to the other person is 30 days instead of 90 days, and the original Dispute Notice and any responses must be provided along with the Dispute Notice for the additional claims.		A respondent who adds an additional party to a claim must complete the steps for applying for CRT Dispute Resolution, except the time frame for providing notice to the other person is 30 days instead of 90 days, and the original Dispute Notice and any responses must be provided along with the Dispute Notice for the additional claims.