Baker v. Morse

Baker v. Morse Court Small Claims Court Date 2025-02-13 Citation 2025 NSSM 10 Docket SCAR 532901 Judge/Registrar/Adjudicator Sarah A. Shiels (Adjudicator) Document Type Decision Decision Content Small Claims Court OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: Baker v. Morse, 2025 NSSM 10 Date: 20250213 Docket: SCAR 532901 Registry: Annapolis Royal Between: Joyce Baker v. Shawn Morse Adjudicator: Sarah A. Shiels Heard: January 28, 2025 Decision: February 13, 2025 Counsel: Nathan Stanley, for the Claimant Bernie Conway and Michael MacKenzie, for the Defendant By the Court: Introduction [1] The claimant, Joyce Baker, seeks to discontinue her claim in Small Claims Court. Essentially, she has elected to pursue her claim in the Supreme Court of Nova Scotia so that her claim will not be subject to the Small Claims Court’s monetary limit of $25,000. She asserts the Supreme Court is the court of appropriate jurisdiction. [2] The defendant, Shawn Morse, opposes the claimant’s request. The defendant submits the Court should not accept the notice of discontinuance prior to determining the question of whether the parties reached a settlement during the course of the Small Claims proceeding. Background [3] This claim was filed on May 1, 2024. A defence was filed on June 20, 2024. An in-person hearing was scheduled for September 5, 2024. [4] The parties attended the Annapolis Royal courthouse for a hearing on September 5, 2024. Before the hearing began, the Court recessed while the parties engaged in out-of-court settlement discussions. The Court was then informed that a settlement had been reached. The Court was briefed generally on the terms of settlement and informed the parties would submit a draft consent order for issuance by the Court at a future point. Following the September 2024 appearance, no draft order was received by the Court and no consent order was issued. [5] The parties returned to Court via telephone on October 28, 2024, November 20, 2024, December 11, 2024 and then on December 18, 2024. The terms of settlement had not been carried out. The defendant’s view was that terms had been agreed to and were binding on the claimant. The claimant’s view was that she was not bound. The parties requested a hearing to determine whether the settlement agreement was binding, to be followed by a second hearing on the merits of the claim before a different adjudicator in the event the agreement of September 5, 2024 was deemed not binding. Accordingly, a hearing was scheduled to be heard by videoconference on January 28, 2025 to determine whether the settlement agreement was binding. [6] On January 16, 2025, the Court received a book of exhibits from the defendant for the purpose of the January 28, 2025 hearing. Then, by letter dated January 17, 2025, the claimant’s lawyer sought a stay of proceedings indicating that original pleadings had been submitted to the Supreme Court of Nova Scotia. By letter dated January 24, 2025, the claimant filed a letter seeking a notice of discontinuance with the Small Claims Court. This letter was accepted for filing by court staff on January 27, 2024. On January 27, 2025 the defendant filed a letter in response to the notice of discontinuance. A further letter from the claimant endorsing its request was received by the Court on January 28, 2025. Law [7] The Small Claims Court Act, RSNS 1989, c 43 (“the Act”) sets out the purpose of the Court at section 2 of that legislation as follows: It is the intent and purpose of this Act to constitute a court wherein claims up to but not exceeding the monetary jurisdiction of the court are adjudicated informally and inexpensively but in accordance with established principles of law and natural justice. R.S., c. 430, s. 2. [8] As provided in section 15 of the Act, the Court does not have jurisdiction to hear claims that are already before another court: The Court does not have jurisdiction in respect of a claim where the issues in dispute are already before another court unless that proceeding is withdrawn, abandoned, struck out or transferred in accordance with Section 19. R.S., c. 430, s. 15; 1992, c. 16, s. 118. [9] The defendant refers the Court to NS Civil Procedure Rule 9.01 and 9.02 for guidance on the timing to file a notice of discontinuance. Rule 9.02(1) refers to the possibility of discontinuing a proceeding before a trial readiness conference or prior to the day of the hearing, depending on the nature of the proceeding. However, the Court notes that Rule 9.02(2) provides that a party may discontinue a proceeding “at any time” with the permission of a judge. Analysis [10] There is no indication that the issues in dispute in this case were before another court at the time when this proceeding was commenced; therefore, section 15 of the Act is not applicable. [11] While it has been considered for guidance, Rule 9 of the Civil Procedure Rules has no direct application to the matter at hand. By design, Small Claims Court proceedings are less formal than litigation in the Supreme Court of Nova Scotia. For example, there is no trial readiness conference per se. However, this Court acknowledges it would be contrary to the spirit of the Rules and particularly Rule 9 to allow a discontinuance midway through a hearing. [12] But that is not what has happened here. The parties elected to engage in settlement discussions before the hearing had properly commenced. While the Court has heard from counsel and parties on numerous occasions, the court has not yet considered any evidence with respect to the issues in dispute. Indeed, the parties agreed that a new adjudicator should preside over the eventual hearing on the merits, had the matter progressed to that stage. Conclusion [13] There has been no hearing on the merits of the claim. In light of the informal nature of the Small Claims Court, this Court finds that the claimant is entitled to discontinue the matter. This Court makes no finding with respect to the alleged settlement agreement. [14] This Court is mindful of the defendant’s participation to-date and, in particular, the readiness of defendant’s counsel to proceed with a hearing on January 28, 2025; however, awards of costs are very limited in Small Claims Court and, as provided by section 15(2) of the Regulations, no agent or barrister fees of any kind shall be awarded to either party. Accordingly, no costs shall be awarded. Sarah A. Shiels, Small Claims Court Adjudicator