Report on the use of jury trials in civil cases

112 Pages·1996·4.4 MB·English

by  Ontario Law Reform Commission

REPORT
ON
THE USE OF JURY TRIALS IN CIVIL CASES
ONTARIO LAW REFORM COMMISSION
Ontario
996
The Ontario Law Reform Commission was established by the Ontario Government in 1964 as an
independent legal research institute. It was the first Law Reform Commission to be created in the
Commonwealth. It recommends reform in statute law, common law, jurisprudence, judicial and
quasi-judicial procedures, and in issues dealing with the administration ofjustice in Ontario.
Commissioners
John D. McCamus, MA, LLB, LLM, Chair
Nathalie Des Rosiers, LLB, LLM*
Sanda Rodgers, BA, LLB, BCL, LLM*
Judge Vibert Lampkin, LLB, LLM*
Counsel
J.J. Morrison, BA (Hon), LLB, LLM, Senior Counsel
Donald F. Bur, LLB, LLM, BCL, PhD
Barbara J. Hendrickson, MA, LLB, LLM
Howard Goldstein, BA (Hon), MES, LLB, LLM
ChiefAdministrator
Mary Lasica, BAA
Secretaries
Tina Afonso
Cora Calixterio
These Commissioners served during the deliberations concerning this report. Their appointments expired, however,
priorto its publication.
The Commission's office is located on the Eleventh Floor at 720 Bay Street, Toronto, Ontario,
Canada, M5G 2K1. Telephone [phone]. FAX [phone].
Canadian Cataloguing in Publication Data
Ontario Law ReformCommission.
Reporton the use ofjurytrials in civil cases
Includes bibliographical references.
ISBN 0-7778-5647-6
1. Jury-Ontario. 2. Civil procedure-Ontario. I. Title.
KEOl144.057 1996 347.713'052 C96-964057-9
Ontario
Law Reform
Commission
Ontario
The Honourable Charles Hamick
Attorney General for Ontario
Dear Attorney:
I have the honour to submit the Ontario Law Reform Commisison's Report
on the Use ofJury Trials in Civil Cases.
John D. McCamus
Chair
October, 1996
Digitized by the Internet Archive
in 2011 with funding from
Osgoode Hall Law School and Law Commission of Ontario
http://www.archive.org/details/reportonuseofjuOOonta
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Letter ofTransmittal iii
Preface ix
CHAPTER INTRODUCTION
1 1
CHAPTER 2 THE CIVIL JURY IN ONTARIO-
BACKGROUND
5
L ORIGINS OF THE CIVIL JURY IN ONTARIO 5
THE PRESENT LAW OF ONTARIO
2. 6
3. THE USE OF CIVIL JURIES 8
CHAPTER 3 EXPERIENCE IN OTHER JURISDICTIONS 13
CIVIL JURY TRIALS IN OTHER JURISDICTIONS—ENABLING
1.
LEGISLATION
13
2. THE USE OF CIVIL JURY TRIALS IN OTHER JURISDICTIONS 16
(a) Canada and England 16
(b) United States 17
3. JURY USER FEES 17
CHAPTER 4 THE ARGUMENTS FOR AND AGAINST
RETAINING THE CIVIL JURY 19
INTRODUCTION
1. 19
2. ARGUMENTS FOR THE RETENTION OF CIVIL JURIES 19
(a) The Safeguard Against Abuse of Power Argument 19
[v]
VI
(b) The Due Process, Community Standards, and Law
Reform Argument 20
'&'
(c) The Catalyst Argument 23
(d) The Competence Argument (For Juries) 23
(e) The Confidence in Fair Treatment Argument 24
(f) The Participation Argument 25
The Burden ofProofArgument 26
(g)
3. ARGUMENTS AGAINST THE RETENTION OF CIVIL JURIES 26
(a) The Cost-Benefit Argument 26
(b) The Tactical Device Argument 27
(c) The Competence (Against Juries) 29
4. EVALUATING THE ARGUMENTS 30
CHAPTER THE CONSULTATION PROCESS
5 31
L CONSULTATION WITH THE BAR AND INTERESTED PARTIES 31
2. CONSULTATION WITH THE REGIONAL SENIOR JUSTICES 35
(a) Length ofJury Trials and Their Effect on Judicial Workload 36
(b) The Jury's Effect on Civil Lists and Settlement Rates 37
(c) Appropriate Cases for Juries 38
(d) Judicial Perceptions ofthe Jury 39
(e) Summary 39
Vll
CHAPTER 6 THE RELATIVE LENGTH OF CIVIL JURY
TRIALS AND THE COST OF CIVIL JURIES 41
THE RELATIVE LENGTH OF CIVIL JURY TRIALS 41
1.
(a) Research Design and Methodology 42
(b) Data Collection 43
(c) Types ofCases and Parties 45
(d) Court Time Taken in Jury and Non-Jury Trials 47
(e) Total Time Required for Jury and Non-Jury Matters 50
2. THE COST OF CIVIL JURIES 52
3. CONCLUSIONS 54
CHAPTER 7 THE IMPACT OF JURY SERVICE ON JURORS 57
THE CONSCRIPTION ISSUE 57
1.
2. EMPLOYMENT SECURITY AND REMUNERATION 58
SURVEY OF JURORS' EXPERIENCE, CONDITIONS,
3.
AND SATISFACTION 63
(a) The Cost ofJury Duty 64
(b) Jurors' Experience and Impressions 66
(c) Jurors' Comments 72
CONCLUSIONS
4. 75
VUl
CHAPTER CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
8
FOR REFORM
77
GENERAL
1. 77
2. JURY USER FEES 79
THE TREATMENT OF JURORS
3. 80
4. AVAILABILITY OF THE JURY IN ACTIONS INVOLVING
THE GOVERNMENT
82
MOTION TO STRIKE OUT A JURY NOTICE OR DISCHARGE
5.
A JURY
83
CONCLUSION
6. 90
SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS
93