Decision Reconsideration Request Concerns For Judicial Errors Are Usually Denied | Bulat Paralegal Service
Helpful?
Yes No Share to Facebook

Decision Reconsideration Request

Concerns For Judicial Errors Are Usually Denied


Question: Can a judge reconsider a decision where it appears that a mistake was made?

Answer: While court decisions are typically final, a judge may reconsider if all parties agree on an evident error that impacts justice. In rare cases, such as when the integrity of the legal process is at risk, a motion for reconsideration could be granted. For reliable assistance navigating this complex area, visit [Success.Legal](https://www.success.legal) to explore your options further.


If a Judge Makes An Error Within a Decision Can the Judge Be Asked to Reconsider the Decision?

After a Judge Issues a Decision It Is, Generally, Accepted In Law That the Decision Is Final and Should Only Be Reconsidered By the Judge If All Parties Agree Due to Concerns Regarding An Obvious Error.


Understanding When It May Be Appropriate to Ask a Judge to Reconsider a Court Decision

Decision Reconsideration Request Concerns For Judicial Errors Are Usually Denied The process of law, including the making of a court decision, seeks to bring finality to issues in dispute.  Accordingly, once a case is decided the law expects that all involved will respect the decision, including any mistakes within the decision, unless taken by Appeal to a higher court.  As such, it is very rare that a Judge will reconsider a decision.

The Law

Although a court, generally, is empowered inherently to control its process, and is therefore empowered to review a rendered decision, whether a court should actually review a decision is highly questionable and is likely to occur only when all parties agree that a decision contained obvious errors and is in need of reconsideration.  This view was well explained in Gupta v. Lindal Cedar Homes Ltd., 2020 ONSC 7524 where it was specifically stated:


[6]  The court has an inherent jurisdiction to adjust a litigation result after judgment in some circumstances, other than through proper appellate review or as contemplated by r. 59.06.  However, this should occur only in “unusual and rare circumstances where the interests of justice compel such a result”: Susin v. Chapman, [2004] O.J. No. 2935 (C.A.), at para. 10.  Finality in litigation is to be encouraged and fostered.  The discretion to re-open a matter should be resorted to “sparingly and with the greatest care”: 671122 Ontario Ltd. v. Sagaz Industries Canada Inc., 2001 SCC 59 (CanLII), [2001] 2 S.C.R. 983, at para. 61.

[7]  In Schmuck v. Reynolds-Schmuck (2000), 2000 CanLII 22323 (ON SC), 46 O.R. (3d) 702 (S.C.J.) at para. 25, Himel, J. emphasized the limited circumstances in which a reconsideration should occur, stating: “It is my view that a party who wishes a reconsideration would have to establish that the integrity of the litigation process is at risk unless it occurs, or that there is some principle of justice at stake that overrides the value of finality in litigation, or that some miscarriage of justice would occur if such a reconsideration did not take place.

[8]  In Gore Mutual Insurance Co. v. 1443249 Ontario Ltd., (2004) 2004 CanLII 27736 (ON SC), 70 O.R. (3d) 404 (“Gore”), at paras. 7-8, Karakatsanis, J. (as she then was) was prepared to re-open her decision in a situation where it was “obvious an error was made by all counsel and by the court.”  It was a “case of a clear error.”  It was “obvious” that the statutory provision now raised would have changed her determination and all counsel conceded that the provision previously relied upon had no application to the case.  Karakatsanis, J. concluded at para. 8 that the “interests of justice are not served by requiring an appeal on a clear error of law that followed inaccurate and incomplete legal submissions of counsel.

[9]  In Scott, Pichelli & Easter Ltd. et al. v. Dupont Developments Ltd. et al., 2019 ONSC 6789, Sossin, J. (as he then was) noted at para. 13 that a “motion for reconsideration is more likely to be successful where the parties agree that an error has occurred, and less likely to be successful where the subject matter of the alleged error remains contested by the parties.”

As indicated, unless all parties consent to a reconsideration, and unless it appears obvious that an error was made, it is likely that a judge will decline a request to reconsider a decision and thereby a decision will stand unless appealed.

Summary Comment

Generally, when a court makes a decision, the decision becomes final and is subject to reversal or correction only via an appeal and only in some very limited circumstances may a judge be willing to reconsider a previously rendered decision.

At
Our Desk Now!
Need Help? Let's Get Started Today

NOTE: Do not send confidential information through the web form.  Use the web form only for your introduction.   Learn Why?
5

NOTE: A significant amount of online searches featuring “lawyers near me” or “best lawyer in” typically indicate a demand for prompt and competent legal assistance rather than a particular professional designation.  In Ontario, licensed paralegals are governed by the same Law Society that regulates lawyers and have the authority to represent clients in specific litigation cases.  Skills in advocacy, legal reasoning, and procedure are vital to this role.  Bulat Paralegal Service provides legal representation within its authorized mandate/scope, focusing on strategic positioning, evidence preparation, and effective advocacy aimed at obtaining swift and advantageous outcomes for clients.

AR, BN, CA+|EN, DT, ES, FA, FR, GU, HE, HI
IT, KO, PA, PT, RU, TA, TL, UK, UR, VI, ZH
Send a Message to: Bulat Paralegal Service

NOTE: Do not send confidential details about your case.  Using this website does not establish a legal-representative/client relationship.  Use the website for your introduction with Bulat Paralegal Service. 
Privacy Policy & Cookies | Terms of Use Your IP Address is: 18.97.9.175




Assistive Controls:  |   |  A A A