Hosts: Hamish Mills-McEwan and Stanford Cummings
Topic: In this technical but timely episode of Civil Banter, Hamish and Stanford explore the evolving world of prejudgment interest in civil litigation. With the help of two recent Ontario Court of Appeal decisions, they break down what prejudgment interest really means, why it matters, and how it’s calculated, especially in personal injury cases. The episode also touches on how these changes might shape litigation strategy and access to justice going forward.
What You'll Learn
- What prejudgment interest is, why it exists, and how it compensates plaintiffs for the delay between injury and judgment.
- The legal framework governing prejudgment interest, including sections of the Courts of Justice Act and related case law.
- How judicial discretion impacts the application of interest rates and the potential risks and rewards for plaintiffs and defendants.
- Why two Court of Appeal decisions, Zaitlen and Aubin, are now essential reading for civil litigators.
- How real-world investment returns are starting to influence judicial decisions about fairness in compensation.
Discussion Points
Small But Big Changes
Hamish and Stanford kick things off by discussing recent changes to how prejudgment interest is awarded in personal injury cases. They explain why these seemingly small percentage differences can have massive impacts on final awards and legal strategy.
Zaitlen Case Breakdown
A medical malpractice case that hinged on whether the statutory 5% interest rate was fair in light of historically low Bank of Canada rates. The Court of Appeal upheld the 5% default, citing a lack of compelling evidence to deviate.
Aubin Case Breakdown
In contrast, the Court of Appeal upped the prejudgment interest rate to 8.46% based on strong evidence that the plaintiff could have earned that return. This ruling could open the door to more in-depth financial evidence being introduced in future personal injury trials.
Legal Context and Risk
Hamish and Stan explore the balancing act between certainty and judicial discretion, and how these decisions may affect discovery, expert evidence, and client expectations. Is a simple 5% rule better for justice, or just efficiency?
LARPing Segment (Lawyers Are Real People-ing)
Stan shares his recent Tarantino rewatch and Hamish recommends The Prestige. While their movie tastes differ, both use film as a way to decompress from the heavy cognitive load of litigation.
Contact Information:
Email: [email protected]
Social Media:
instagram.com/nelliganlaw
facebook.com/nelliganlaw
Thanks for tuning into Episode 4 of Civil Banter. Whether you’re a lawyer, law student, or someone curious about how civil law actually works, this episode will help you understand how even abstract topics like interest rates can deeply influence access to justice. Join Hamish and Stan next time as they continue to tackle tough legal issues and share what’s on their screens when court’s out.