Civil Resolution Tribunal

Agency overview
Formed	2015
Type	Administrative Tribunal
Jurisdiction	Government of British Columbia
Minister responsible	Niki Sharma, Attorney General
Agency executive	Shelley Lopez, Acting Chair
Parent department	Ministry of Attorney General
Website	https://civilresolutionbc.ca/

The Civil Resolution Tribunal (CRT) is Canada's first online tribunal, ^[1] located in British Columbia (BC), Canada created under a Provincial statute. It is one of the first examples in the world of online dispute resolution (ODR) being incorporated into the public justice system.

The CRT is an administrative tribunal with different legal standards ^[2] than BC Court Services and court system.

History

The CRT was established as a quasi-judicial administrative tribunal under the CRTA which came into force March 15, 2013. The CRT was established under the Civil Resolution Tribunal Act (2012), which was amended in 2015. ^[3] The Tribunal commenced public operations on July 13, 2016.

The CRT initially only had jurisdiction over small claims and strata property (condominium) disputes with a limited cost cap. The BC Government through the Strata Property Act (SPA) enables any private land owner to create a strata, which can be single family, duplex, triplex, multi-residential dwellings and also commercial properties such as stores, restaurants, airports, marinas, golf courses, fractional vacation properties, etc. Strata corporations are unlimited liability corporations with no shareholders.

On April 23, 2018, the government of British Columbia introduced legislation to expand the CRT's jurisdiction to include certain motor vehicle accident disputes, disputes for some sections of the Societies Act, and the Co-operative Association Act.

The CRT was subsequently was expanded through varied enactments and includes small, large and complex claims for varied civil matters. The CRT now adjudicates claims for six statutes. However, CRTA s. 117 also enables the CRT to be delegated other enactments and on its website it includes the Insurance (Vehicle) Act and the Business Practices and Consumer Protection Act.

The May 7, ^[4] 8 ^[5] and 30, ^[6] 2012 Hansard records show the Civil Resolution Tribunal Act (CRTA) was introduced and passed to provide an informal justice option for minor disputes as part of the Government’s justice reform initiative, with a mandate reported to be to provide a more accessible justice system.

The Tribunal derives its powers from statute rather than the inherent jurisdiction of the courts, and initially was intended to enable the use of digital technology to resolve some minor civil disputes starting with sections of law for stratas.

On May 31, 2012 Bill 44 was given Royal Assent establishing the CRTA, which enabling the creation of the CRT. The enactments in effect for the CRT are:

1. 2012 BILL 44, Civil Resolution Tribunal Act
2. 2018 Bill 22, Civil Resolution Tribunal Amendment Act
3. 2021 Bill 21, Miscellaneous Statutes Amendment Act (No. 2)
4. 2022 Bill 9, Attorney General Statutes Amendment Act

The Tribunal adjudicates some sections of some civil laws, determined within CRTA, for:

1. Small Claims Act
2. Strata Property Act, Strata Property Regulation and Bare Land Strata Regulation
3. Cooperative Association Act
4. Societies Act
5. Insurance (Vehicle) Act and Accident Claims Regulation
6. 2023 Bill 12, The Intimate Images Protection Act

CRT Rules

The Civil Resolution Tribunal (CRT) operates independently, establishing its own rules rather than being dictated by governmental mandates. These rules function akin to an instructional manual, facilitating fairness, transparency, and consistency within the tribunal's operations.

As part of its commitment to upholding these principles, the CRT undertakes regular reviews and updates of its regulations. This ensures that the rules remain clear, coherent, and equitable for all parties involved in dispute resolution processes. ^[7]

Standard Rules

Standard Rules apply to all types of CRT disputes other than certain types of claims under the Intimate Images Protection Act. From 2016 to February 2024 the CRT changed its rules sixteen times.

The Intimate Image Protection Order Rules

As of February 2024 the CRT established a second set of rules for the Intimate Image Protection Act, while the other components are under the CRT Standard Rules.

Dispute Resolution Process

The CRT provides the public with access to interactive information pathways, tools, and a variety of dispute resolution methods including negotiation, facilitation and, if necessary, adjudication. Participants are to use these justice services from a computer or mobile device. For those who are unable or unwilling to use technology to resolve their dispute, the tribunal provides paper-based or telephone-based services. ^[8]

CRT Design - Stages 1 to 4

The design of the quasi-judicial design of the CRT differs from court and has four stages being:

1. Solution Explorer - make or respond to a claim.
2. Online Negotiation with participating parties.
3. Facilitation with CRT staff.
4. Adjudication.

Stage 1 - Apply & Respond - Solution Explorer & Dispute Notice Application

Stage 1 of the design is the online Solution Explorer, which all users must use. CRT counts each use as a positive data set and reuses it as a performance measure.

At the end of stage 1 users are taken to the legal application process called Dispute Notice. The final Dispute Notice Claim statement functions as a legal application and is based on CRT instruction.

Parties may counterclaim at this stage by completing an additional Dispute Notice.

Stage 2 – Online Negotiation

The negotiation stage starts after the respondents reply to a claim. If users do not reach an agreement during the negotiation stage a CRT case manager contacts them to begin the facilitation stage.

Stage 3 - Facilitation inclusive of Mediation, and Arguments and Evidence Submissions

Stage 3 has multiple activities beginning with mediation, which is generally one phone call with a CRT staff person called a Facilitator about the claim/s. The timing is strictly limited and differs from dispute resolution norms and jurisprudence. Facilitation is by phone, email or both. Some communications are done with all participants, and others only be between a user and the CRT Case Manager.

If unsuccessful CRT requires parties to submit evidence for the adjudication stage. This is done two-weeks prior to their argument (legal summary).

A claimant then submits a written argument through a digital portal with character restrictions. Two weeks later the respondent replies, and then one week later the claimant provides a final response unless the CRT allows extensions.

The CRT also does not action penalties or its summons powers. In the case of penalties, it informs users that the CRT penalties must be initiated through an Offence Act claim by police or on their own. This process is external of the CRT.

Stage 4 - Adjudication, CRT Decision and Feedback

If the parties are unable to reach resolution a claim proceeds to adjudication.

Parties who disagree with a CRT final decision can petition the BC Supreme Court for judicial review with the standard of review set within the CRTA.

Following the release of a decision the CRT seeks qualitative feedback from users. It uses the response for performance and academic purposes. This data is also used in the CRT Annual Reports for April 1 to March 31 fiscal years.

By legislative default Bill 44 requires parties to self-represent. CRTA section 20 restricts the use of lawyers, other than motor vehicle accident claims, in CRT proceedings.

Administration of Justice

The CRTA establishes the standards for both the administration of justice and some sections of some civil laws delegated to it. The CRTA also delegates the CRT the power to interpret laws and regulations for several sections of laws delegated to it, which differs from the regular courts.

As the tribunal created under an administrative law the CRT has not endorsed or incorporated the Statement of Principles on Self-represented Litigants and Accused Persons established by the Canadian Judicial Council, while the Supreme Court of Canada endorsed the Principles in Pintea v. Johns, 2017 SCC 23 [2017] 1 SCR 470.

CRT Vice-Chair Escalations

In November 2022, the BC Government and CRT created and filled the Vice-Chair Escalations position. The Vice-Chair Escalations performs an adjudicative and dispute resolution function within the tribunal. The position receives escalations and decides on interim applications on all disputes.

Enforcement

Under section 57 of the Civil Resolution Tribunal Act (CRTA), a validated copy of the CRT’s order can be enforced through the Supreme Court of British Columbia if it is an order for financial compensation or return of personal property over $35,000. ^[9] Under section 58 of the CRTA, the order can be enforced through the Provincial Court of British Columbia if it is an order for financial compensation or return of personal property under $35,000. ^[10] Once filed, a CRT order has the same force and effect as an order of the court that it is filed in. ^[11]

Enforcement of equitable or large claims requires a British Columbia Supreme Court contempt of court claim, which has strict legal standards to be successful. The burden of costs and proof is on the claimant.

Judicial Review

Pursuant to section 56.6 of the CRTA, a party may only petition the Supreme Court of British Columbia for a judicial review of a CRT decision. A petition must commence within 60 days from the date of a CRT decision. ^[12] In a judicial review, the remedies a court can give are restricted. The court generally determines whether the tribunal had the authority to make a particular decision and whether the tribunal exercised that authority. ^[13]

The Supreme Court will not interfere with the CRT Decision unless the Decision is patently unreasonable. ^[14] The courts hold that, "Even if the court considers parts of the tribunal’s rationale to be flawed or unreasonable, so long as the decision as a whole is reasonable, no patent unreasonableness can be found." ^[15]

Annual Reports

CRT publishes annual reports each fiscal year since 2016-17.

Chairs

Shannon Salter 2015

Simmi Sandhu 2022

References

• Henderson, B. (June 23, 2019). "Is access to justice a design problem?". Legal Evolution. Legal Blog Indiana University Maurer School of Law.

External links

• Official website

This article about Canadian law is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it.

• v
• t
• e