Yes No Share to Facebook
Decision Reconsideration Request
Concerns For Judicial Errors Are Usually Denied
Last Updated: July 08 2026
Question: Is it proper to ask a judge to reconsider a court decision in Ontario when it seems an error was made?
Answer: In Ontario, it is generally proper to ask a judge to reconsider only in unusual and rare circumstances, because court decisions are meant to be final and correction is usually done through an appeal rather than a re-opening by the same judge. The court may have inherent jurisdiction to adjust a litigation result after judgment, but it typically requires that the integrity of the process be at risk or that a miscarriage of justice would occur, and courts have said discretion to re-open should be used sparingly and with the greatest care in 671122 Ontario Ltd. v. Sagaz Industries Canada Inc., 2001 SCC 59. A key practical point is that reconsideration is more likely if all parties consent and it is “obvious” that a clear error occurred, as discussed in Gupta v. Lindal Cedar Homes Ltd., 2020 ONSC 7524. If you are considering this type of step, Vescio Legal Services can help you assess whether the request is realistic, whether the error is truly clear, and what next procedural move may be best for your situation in Ontario, contact (416) 400-8255 to discuss your options today.
If a Judge Makes An Error Within a Decision Can the Judge Be Asked to Reconsider the Decision?
After a Judge Issues a Decision It Is, Generally, Accepted In Law That the Decision Is Final and Should Only Be Reconsidered By the Judge If All Parties Agree Due to Concerns Regarding An Obvious Error.
Understanding When It May Be Appropriate to Ask a Judge to Reconsider a Court Decision
The legal process that involves the court making a judicial decision is intended to finalize matters in dispute. Accordingly, once a case is decided the law expects that all involved will respect the decision, including any mistakes within the decision, unless taken by Appeal to a higher court. As such, it is very rare that a Judge will reconsider a decision.
The Law
Generally, a court has the jurisdiction to control its process which includes the power to review a decision of itself; however, whether a court should review a decision of itself still remains questionable and should occur only where it becomes obvious to the court and parties that a decision was flawed and the parties consent to a reconsideration. This issue was specifically addressed within the case of Gupta v. Lindal Cedar Homes Ltd., 2020 ONSC 7524 wherein it was said:
[6] The court has an inherent jurisdiction to adjust a litigation result after judgment in some circumstances, other than through proper appellate review or as contemplated by r. 59.06. However, this should occur only in “unusual and rare circumstances where the interests of justice compel such a result”: Susin v. Chapman, [2004] O.J. No. 2935 (C.A.), at para. 10. Finality in litigation is to be encouraged and fostered. The discretion to re-open a matter should be resorted to “sparingly and with the greatest care”: 671122 Ontario Ltd. v. Sagaz Industries Canada Inc., 2001 SCC 59 (CanLII), [2001] 2 S.C.R. 983, at para. 61.
[7] In Schmuck v. Reynolds-Schmuck (2000), 2000 CanLII 22323 (ON SC), 46 O.R. (3d) 702 (S.C.J.) at para. 25, Himel, J. emphasized the limited circumstances in which a reconsideration should occur, stating: “It is my view that a party who wishes a reconsideration would have to establish that the integrity of the litigation process is at risk unless it occurs, or that there is some principle of justice at stake that overrides the value of finality in litigation, or that some miscarriage of justice would occur if such a reconsideration did not take place.”
[8] In Gore Mutual Insurance Co. v. 1443249 Ontario Ltd., (2004) 2004 CanLII 27736 (ON SC), 70 O.R. (3d) 404 (“Gore”), at paras. 7-8, Karakatsanis, J. (as she then was) was prepared to re-open her decision in a situation where it was “obvious an error was made by all counsel and by the court.” It was a “case of a clear error.” It was “obvious” that the statutory provision now raised would have changed her determination and all counsel conceded that the provision previously relied upon had no application to the case. Karakatsanis, J. concluded at para. 8 that the “interests of justice are not served by requiring an appeal on a clear error of law that followed inaccurate and incomplete legal submissions of counsel.”
[9] In Scott, Pichelli & Easter Ltd. et al. v. Dupont Developments Ltd. et al., 2019 ONSC 6789, Sossin, J. (as he then was) noted at para. 13 that a “motion for reconsideration is more likely to be successful where the parties agree that an error has occurred, and less likely to be successful where the subject matter of the alleged error remains contested by the parties.”
As stated within the Gupta case, generally, a judicial reconsideration is unlikely unless all parties involved agree that a judicial error occurred and that a reconsideration is a just means to seek a correction of the error.
Summary Comment
Generally, when a court makes a decision, the decision becomes final and is subject to reversal or correction only via an appeal and only in some very limited circumstances may a judge be willing to reconsider a previously rendered decision.
NOTE: A considerable amount of online searches featuring “lawyers near me” or “best lawyer in” typically indicate a desire for prompt and proficient legal support instead of a particular professional designation. In Ontario, licensed paralegals are overseen by the same Law Society that governs lawyers and have the authority to represent clients in specific litigation issues. Key components of that role include advocacy, legal analysis, and procedural expertise. Vescio Legal Services provides legal representation within its licensed scope, focusing on strategic positioning, evidentiary preparation, and compelling advocacy intended to achieve efficient and beneficial outcomes for clients.