![handle is hein.journals/alblr55 and id is 1 raw text is:
HRYNIAK V. 3I4 ULDIN COMES TO ALBERTA
HRYNIAK V. MAULDIN COMES TO ALBERTA:
SUMMARY JUDGMENT, CULTURE SHIFT,
AND THE FUTURE OF CIVIL TRIALS
BARBARA BILLINGSLEY*
Alberta's law of civil procedure, and summary judgment in particular, has experienced a
culture shift since the Supreme Court of Canada's ruling in Hryniakv. Mauldin This article
asks whether litigation directed toward a conventional trial is now, or is soon to be, a thing
of the past. Although intended to revive traditional trials as a realistic and timely resolution
option, it is impossible to sayyet ifthis will be Hryniak's legacy in Alberta. Three things are
clear in post-Hryniak Albertan jurisprudence, however:first, the Hryniak test governs the
determination of summary judgment applications in Alberta; second, Alberta courts have
embraced the callfor proportionality in litigation procedure; and third, the Hryniak culture
shift creates uncertainty for Alberta litigants.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. INTRODU CTION ............................................... 1
II. HR YNIAK V. M A UL DIN .......................................... 2
A. SUMMARY JUDGMENT ..................................... 3
B. CULTURE SHIFT ............................................ 5
III. MIGRATION OF THE HRYNIAK TEST:
SUMMARY JUDGMENT IN ALBERTA ................................. 7
A. ALBERTA'S SUMMARY JUDGMENT RULE ........................ 8
B. PRE-HRYNIAK JURISPRUDENCE ................................ 10
C. POST-HRYNIAK JURISPRUDENCE ............................... 11
D. W HERE ARE W E NOW ? ................................... 16
IV. MIGRATION OF HRYNIAK'S CULTURE SHIFT TO ALBERTA ............ 19
A. THE RATIONALE FOR CULTURE SHIFT IN ALBERTA .............. 20
B. IMPACT OF THE CULTURE SHIFT ............................. 22
C. W HERE ARE W E Now? ................................... 27
V . C ONCLUSION ............................................... 29
APPENDIX A: ONTARIO'S SUMMARY JUDGMENT RULE ............... 31
APPENDIX B: ALBERTA'S SUMMARY JUDGMENT RULE ............... 36
APPENDIX C: ALBERTA CASES ON CULTURE SHIFT ................... 37
I. INTRODUCTION
Is trial-based litigation alive and well in Alberta's post-Hryniak world? On 23 January
2014, the Supreme Court of Canada issued its ruling in Hryniak v. Mauldin' and provided
a roadmap for the judicial consideration of summary judgment applications under Ontario's
summary judgment rule. Noting that the time and cost of civil litigation impedes access to
Professor, Faculty of Law, University of Alberta. Thanks to my colleague Assistant Professor Anna
Lund for hervaluable comments on an earlier draft of this article, and to JoshUngar and Paul Welke for
their diligent research assistance while they were students at the University of Alberta, Faculty of Law.
Without their help, this article would not have been possible. The case law considered in this article is
current to 30 September 2016. Any errors, of course, are my own.
2014 SCC 7, [2014] 1 SCR 87 [Hryniak].](ViewImageLocal?handle=hein.journals/alblr55&div=1&collection=&method=preview&ext=.png&size=3)
What Is HeinOnline?
Contact us for annual subscription options:
Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?
profiles profiles most
Contact us for annual subscription options:
Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?
profiles profiles most
Contact us for annual subscription options:
Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?
profiles profiles most