Last Updated: August 22 2026
How do I know whether a document or witness testimony is relevant and must be disclosed in an Ontario civil lawsuit?
In Ontario civil litigation, relevance is about whether the evidence has a logical connection to a fact in issue, meaning it makes the disputed proposition more or less likely as a matter of human experience, which is typically a low threshold, and if even one part of a document is relevant it generally must be produced for discovery; under the Rules of Civil Procedure, documents relevant to matters in issue that were in a party’s possession, control, or power must be disclosed even if privilege is claimed, and in the Small Claims Court the court may admit relevant evidence and the disclosure framework focuses on documents relied on at trial rather than all potentially relevant material, so your best next step is to review your pleadings and identify how each piece of evidence supports or undermines specific issues; if you want a clear, tribunal-ready evidence and disclosure plan for your case, Lo Greco Law provides 30+ year experienced lawyer services and LSO tribunal representation across Ontario, call (416) 488-4110 for help getting what matters before trial.
Add this website to Google Preferred Sources
Determining What Evidence Is Relevant
The relevance and admissibility of evidence, whether it is in the form of testimony or documents, in civil litigation proceedings is determined by assessing whether there is a logical link between the evidence and the facts and issues in dispute. The relevance of a document will also be used to determine if the document is discoverable and must be shared with other dispute litigants.
Note: Please contact Lo Greco Law by phone at: (416) 488-4110 to discuss any specific questions that you may have.
The Law
The Rules of Civil Procedure, R.R.O. 1990, Regulation 194, as well as the Rules of the Small Claims Court, O. Reg. 258/98, and the common law including the decision in Algarawi v. Berger; and Porter v. Sutandar, 2023 ONSC 2339, all provide instructive guidance to help when determining whether evidence is relevant. These laws specifically state:
Written Statements, Documents and Records
18.02 (1) A document or written statement or an audio or visual record that has been served, at least 30 days before the trial date, on all parties who were served with the notice of trial, shall be received in evidence, unless the trial judge orders otherwise.
(2) Subrule (1) applies to the following written statements and documents:
1. The signed written statement of any witness, including the written report of an expert, to the extent that the statement relates to facts and opinions to which the witness would be permitted to testify in person.
2. Any other document, including but not limited to a hospital record or medical report made in the course of care and treatment, a financial record, a receipt, a bill, documentary evidence of loss of income or property damage, and a repair estimate.
[18] To be received at trial, evidence must be admissible, and the trial judge must not have exercised her discretion to exclude the evidence. To be admissible, evidence must be relevant and not subject to exclusion under any other rules of law or policy (for example, because of privilege).
[19] For evidence to be relevant, it must have some tendency as a matter of logic and human experience to make the proposition for which it is advanced more likely or less likely than the proposition would be in the absence of the evidence.[10] This is not a high bar.
[20] Determining relevance is an exercise in the application of experience and common sense.[11] Justice Doherty put it this way:
Relevance as explained in these authorities requires a determination of whether as a matter of human experience and logic the existence of "Fact A" makes the existence or non-existence of "Fact B" more probable than it would be without the existence of "Fact A". If it does then "Fact A" is relevant to "Fact B". As long as "Fact B" is itself a material fact in issue or is relevant to a material fact in issue in the litigation then "Fact A" is relevant and prima facie admissible.[12]
[21] Relevance on discovery is determined by the pleadings. If even one part of a document is relevant, it must be produced.[13] Every document relevant to any matter in issue in an action that is or has been in the possession, power, or control of a party to the action shall be disclosed.[14] A document may be produced for discovery because it is relevant notwithstanding that it may not be admissible at trial.[15] A person examined for discovery shall answer any proper question relevant to any matter in issue in the proceeding.[16]
Court Cases
Interestingly, and unlike cases in the higher court, for matters in the Small Claims Court hearsay evidence is permissible per section 27 of the Courts of Justice Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. C.43, which states:
Evidence
27 (1) Subject to subsections (3) and (4), the Small Claims Court may admit as evidence at a hearing and act upon any oral testimony and any document or other thing so long as the evidence is relevant to the subject-matter of the proceeding, but the court may exclude anything unduly repetitious.
Same
(2) Subsection (1) applies whether or not the evidence is given or proven under oath or affirmation or admissible as evidence in any other court.
Same
(3) Nothing is admissible in evidence at a hearing,
(a) that would be inadmissible by reason of any privilege under the law of evidence; or
(b) that is inadmissible by any Act.
Conflicts
(4) Nothing in subsection (1) overrides the provisions of any Act expressly limiting the extent to or purposes for which any oral testimony, documents or things may be admitted or used in evidence in any proceeding.
Copies
(5) A copy of a document or any other thing may be admitted as evidence at a hearing if the presiding judge is satisfied as to its authenticity.
Furthermore, and also unlike the evidence rules within the higher court, the Rules of the Small Claims Court are without a requirement to disclose all relevant evidence and instead require only the disclosure of evidence that may be relied upon at Trial. Specifically, the Rules of the Small Claims Court state:
Disclosure
13.03 (2) At least 14 days before the date of the settlement conference, each party shall serve on every other party and file with the court,
(a) a copy of any document to be relied on at the trial, including an expert report, not attached to the party’s claim or defence ...
Additionally, the Rules of the Small Claims Court lack a rule addressing if, when, and how, an Order for production or inspection of evidence may be imposed; and accordingly, for guidance with these issues, reference to prior case decisions is required.
Conclusion
The admissibility of evidence in court is contingent upon the relevancy of the evidence. If the evidence has a reasonable chance of proving or disproving a fact in dispute, then it may be admitted. Otherwise, it will considered irrelevant and invalid to the court proceedings.
