Talk:Court of Ontario

creation of article for Court of Ontario

Maybe in practice the Ontario Superior Court of Justice and the Ontario Court of Justice operate separately as individual courts, but under the legislation (Section 10 of the Courts of Justice Act), those two courts are merely divisions of the Court of Ontario. The "Court of Ontario" does not seem to have its own office, or its own page at the Ontario Courts web site. Nevertheless, the Court of Ontario does exist, legally. The Court of Ontario is mentioned in only three sections of the Courts of Justice Act: section 1.1, section 10, and subsection 52(4). --Mathew5000 (talk) 09:50, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

I'm wondering if this article is necessary... It's true the Act states that the Court of Justice and the Superior Court of Justice are two divisions of the Court of Ontario. But it never comes up in practice. In fact, it seems to be a legal term found in the Act that never comes up anywhere else - including the courts themselves! :)

Considering the extremely limited role of the term 'Court of Ontario' in legal and common practice, I'm wondering if it just might be appropriate to explain the term on the Ontario Superior Court of Justice and Ontario Court of Justice articles rather than create a whole new article for the term.

I know that until you brought the section to my attention I didn't realize that the 'Court of Ontario' was a real legal term, but I think we can avoid others jumping to similar conclusions by just making sure the term is properly referenced in the other articles rather than having a completely new article. Singularity42 (talk) 18:17, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

I see your point, but I tend to think that Wikipedia should have a short article for the "Court of Ontario", for the sake of completeness. The article should of course include a note that in some ways this is more of a theoretical court than a functioning court, but that would have to be sourced to a reliable source. --Mathew5000 (talk) 19:02, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

That's probably because there are almost no sources that use the term "Court of Ontario". A Quicklaw search of cases since the Act came into force (ignoring terms like 'Divisional Court of Ontario', 'Small Claims Court of Ontario', etc.) gives no relevant hits.

Personally, I think any article specificially raising the term 'Court of Ontario' should be part of a history article that would make more sense. Two good websites explaining the history of the Ontario court reforms are the 2005 Annual Report of the Ontario Court of Justice (check out the history section) and this random website from some private litigation firm. The latter is an interesting read, but definitely not a reliable source (although I would be interested in knowing what their sources are). The former probably could be considered a reliable source.

Anyway, although I still question whether the article should exist, I'm not going to push the issue. However, I would propose two additions that might prevent confusion from those less familiar with the Ontario court structure: " 'Court of Ontario' should not be confused as an actual physical court, but rather a formal legal title describing the combination of both levels of trial courts in Ontario." and "Although the Ontario Superior Court of Justice and Ontario Court of Justice are formally divisions of the Court of Ontario, the two courts have very different rules, powers, and jurisdictions, and their judges are appointed by different levels of government." What do you think? Singularity42 (talk) 14:24, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

I like your wording of "formal legal title describing the combination of both levels..."; I will incorporate that into the article. I'm actually sort of curious now as to why the Ontario government chose to do it that way, calling the two trial courts divisions of one single court rather than separate courts in their own right. (In the version of the bill as proposed at first reading, the term used was "Trial Court of Ontario" rather than "Court of Ontario".) It would be good to get some input from other editors as to the best way to deal with this, whether an article should even exist for Court of Ontario and the best way to convey the idea that although it exists on paper, no one ever talks about the "Court of Ontario" as such. --Mathew5000 (talk) 15:49, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Whatever this adds by way of completeness is overshadowed 100-fold by the confusion it causes regarding the structure of courts in Ontario. It appears the Court of Ontario is a historical anomoly. It isn't a "court" in any meaningful sense of the word. It is certainly not a court that ever sits or hears cases. This article and the references to the Court of Ontario in the Superior Court of Justice article suggests that a more interlocking relationship betweent the two courts exists. The Superior Court is a section 96 court. Its judges are appointed by the federal government. The Ontario Court of Justice is a provincial court whose judges are appointed by the province. The constitution gives the power to provinces to govern the administration of the courts within the province. The Courts of Justice Act does this. In short, the Court for Ontario is essentially a legal term. I would recomend this article be taken down in favour of one on the history of the courts in Ontario. 142.108.145.91 (talk) 18:39, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Just to clarify, the last post was made by another student in my office (hence the same IP address) - not a sock puppet. I've changed the signatures from my prior additions to direct to my new account in order to avoid confusion. Singularity42 (talk) 18:46, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Project tag ratings

I have changed the importance rating of this article from High to "Mid", and will do the same for the Ont.Court of Justice and the Ont.Superior Court. PKT (talk) 17:27, 9 February 2008 (UTC)