How Do I Sue For Breach of Contract In Small Claims Court?
Suing For Breach of Contract In Small Claims Court Requires a Careful Review of the Relevant Facts, Available Evidence, Available Witnesses, Applicable Laws, Among Other Things. A Legal Case Should Always Be Undertaken With Informed Caution Based on Quality Legal Advice.
Similar Questions About Suing For Breach of Contract In Small Claims Court Include:
- Is It Easy to Sue For Breach of Contract In Small Claims Court?
- Can a Person Sue For Breach of Contract In Small Claims Court?
- What Should I Know About Suing For Breach of Contract In Small Claims Court?
- Is Suing In Small Claims Court For a Breach of Contract Difficult?
- How Do I Sue For Breach of Contract In Small Claims Court?
Understanding How to Sue For Breach of Contract Within a Small Claims Court Lawsuit
It is plain and obvious to all reasonably minded people that after person, including a business, agree to a form a legally binding contract with another person, or business, that all people, or businesses, involved will abide by the commitments within the contract and thereby honour what was agreed to. Accordingly, when a person, or business, fails to honour the commitments within the binding contract, a lawsuit for breach of contract may result. With this said, it is important that the person, or business, that perceives the contract is breached to subjectively review the situation and carefully assess the likelihood of success before starting a lawsuit. As the loser in a legal case, generally, pays costs for failing to succeed in the lawsuit, the assessment should involve some level of objective professional expertise as assistance in the review.
What is a Breach of Contract?
When attempting to determine if a contract was legally breached, the first step is to determine whether a binding contract even existed. Of course, there may be a situation where people negotiated, seemed to agree to various terms, shook hands, signed a document, among other things; however, what legally constitutes as a binding and enforceable contract involves much more than just outward appearances. To determine whether a legally binding and enforceable contract actually existed and thereafter determine if the contract was improperly breached a thorough review is required. When conducting the review, carefully consider whether:
- The discussions had, and agreements made, meet the legal elements necessary for the formation of a binding contract;
- The formation of the contract can be reasonably proven with clear evidence of the express terms as well as any implied terms which constitute the ultimate agreement;
- The laws that may limit or restrict application or interpretation of the contract are reviewed including concerns such as;
- The parol evidence rule and whether what is subjectively perceived as the ultimate agreement will hold up in a court;
- The possibility of ambiguous terms that may initiate the contra proferentem doctrine;
- The potential for concerns regarding undisclosed onerous term clauses that may be struck by a court;
- The statutes that may void or alter or otherwise supercede contract terms; and
- The many other concerns applicable to contract law disputes.
Once it is well understood that a legally enforceable contract existed, within binding terms, and that evidence and circumstances will show that a party failed to fulfill the terms of the agreement, the next step is to consider:
- What parties, meaning who, should the allegations be aimed at;
- What factual allegations should be made, meaning what details of the situation are relevant to tell the necessary story;
- What legal allegations should be made, meaning that reasons for suing beyond just breach of contract may apply such as negligence, among other legal issues;
- What legal remedies should be claimed, meaning what type of compensation and what amount of compensation should be sought;
- What is the best timing for commencing the lawsuit;
- What further risks should be considered such as, among other things;
- The risk of a counterclaim (known in Small Claims Court as a Defendant's Claim);
- The risk of difficulty in obtaining evidence, or witnesses, to prove the allegations; and
- The risk of failing to succeed in the case and being ordered to pay costs.
What Are the Legal Remedies Available in Small Claims Court?
The jurisdiction in the Small Claims Court, meaning power of the court, which also means power of the Judge to issue an Order, is limited by section 23(1) of the Courts of Justice Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. 43 so to provide only the power to order compensation in the form of money or to order the return of property. In a breach of contract case, often a party bringing a claim will want the Judge to order the breaching party to perform the contract in accordance to the agreement. This is called "specific performance" and is a remedy unavailable from the Small Claims Court. Instead, the Small Claims Court may order that the breaching party pay a sum of money that is necessary to compensate for losses arising from the failure to perform by the breaching party. This sum may be, and often is, the cost to hire a substitute party to complete what the breaching party failed to perform.
As an example, and an example common to the Small Claims Court system, a homeowner may sue a contractor for failure to complete a renovation project. The homeowner would be unable to receive an Order from the Small Claims Court instructing the breaching contractor to complete the renovation project; however, the homeowner may be able to receive an Order from the Small Claims Court instructing the breaching contractor to pay the sum of money necessary to compensate the homeowner for the costs incurred in hiring a substitute contractor to complete the renovation project.
Other remedies concerns involve whether to make claims for just actual losses (actual damages), meaning claims that seek to recoup money out-of-pocket due to the breach as well as the possibility of stress claims (general damages), and potentially punitive damages as a deterent if the breach of contract was done in a highly malicious or egregious manner that would offend the court so significantly that a punishment is appropriate.
What Should a Breach of Contract Victim Do?
As outlined in brief above, a breach of contract case may be much more complicated than first appears. Prior to starting a lawsuit, it is wise to review the situation carefully and obtain legal advice based on the merits of the case and likelihood of success. Preparing a strategic gameplan is also imperative as advantages, or disadvantages, may arise as a case moves forward, especially as there are almost always unexpected surprises during the course of litigation.
A breach of contract case brought in Small Claims Court is often misperceived as a relatively simple matter; however, the law, even in Small Claims Court, may be much more complex that what appears at first glance. Before starting a breach of contract case in Small Claims Court it is wise to thoroughly review and understand the law regarding contractual formation, contractual interpretation, available remedies, among other things. Most significantly, it is wise to obtain legal advice such as an informed opinion from Reder Aylwin Gillis regarding the potential pitfalls, challenges, and likelihood of success. Most importantly, avoid taking Small Claims Court matters lightly. With a limit of $35,000 per Plaintiff, the Small Claims Court now involves matters that are rarely small to most people.
Reder Aylwin Gillis is an affordable Paralegal in:
Learn More About
Contract Law Disputes:
There are various form of breach of contract. Each form of breach of contract has unique criteria. Available legal remedies for the various forms of breach...Learn More
After negotiations, if the essential terms are incomplete despite purported acceptance of a 'deal', then the parties have merely agreed to agree rather than...Learn More
A service provider that agrees to provide a service for a specific period of time at a specific price is unable to change the price until the agreed upon...Learn More
Contra proferentem is a rule of contract interpretation that says ambiguous or conflicting terms within a contract should, generally, be construed against the...Learn More
For a legally binding contract to exist, six constituent elements must be present. The six elements are 'offer', 'acceptance', 'consideration', 'intention',...Learn More
When a contract contains terms, conditions, or clauses, requiring performance of an impossibility, the requirement to do so is a nullity.Learn More
Basic contract law principles require that the object and purpose and terms of a contract be lawful and moral if the courts are to uphold and enforce the...Learn More
A liability waiver, when genuinely agreed to, remains very limited and applicable only to those risks willingly assumed. Generally, a waiver is also unable to...Learn More
Often businesses will attempt to impose a 'limited liability clause' within contractual agreements. To the party against whom such a clause is against, such a...Learn More
Contract clauses that contain especially harsh terms must explicitly and clearly be pointed out or courts may deem the clause as an onerous term and deemed...Learn More
The parol evidence rule states that where a written contract exists and such contains a complete express term, evidence and argument that the term is altered...Learn More
What Happens If Parties Agree to Contract Terms But Then Ignore the Contract Terms? Where Contract Terms Are Ignored By the Contract Parties the Right to...Learn More
After a breakup, the formerly dating couple may engage within a legal dispute over whether money provided during the relationship was a loan or a gift.Learn More