Yes No Share to Facebook
Small Claims Court Limit
Involves Net From Set-Off Upon Sum Assessed
Last Updated: July 02 2026
Question: What is the set-off amount calculation in Ontario Small Claims Court when the court award limit is capped at $35,000 but the assessed counterclaim exceeds that limit?
Answer: DK Legal Practice can help you understand how set-off works in Ontario’s Small Claims Court: the $35,000 limit governs the net judgment the court can award, not the gross amount the court may assess on a claim or counterclaim. In practice, if the court assesses a counterclaim for an amount over $35,000, the set-off is generally calculated from the assessed counterclaim amount, not from the court’s monetary jurisdiction cap, as long as the final net judgment remains within the Small Claims Court award limit. The Divisional Court’s reasoning in 2146100 Ontario Ltd. v. 2052750 Ontario Inc., 2013 ONSC 2483 supports this approach. If you tell us the assessed amounts and how the net judgment was calculated, DK Legal Practice can help you check whether the set-off was computed correctly, call (416) 906-6663 to discuss your Ontario matter.
If a Set-Off Applies In a Small Claims Court Case, Is the Set-Off Amount Based Upon the Court Limit As a the Maximum Starting Point?
If a Sum Is Assessed That Exceeds the Maximum Amount Allowed By the Small Claims Court, Any Set-Off Will Be taken From the Assessed Amount Rather Than Court Award Limit; However, the Total Amount Awarded Must Remain Within the Court Award Limit.
Understanding the Small Claims Court Jurisdiction to Award Judgment As Net Set-Off Despite An Above Limit Assessment
In the Small Claims Court, the amount that can be awarded as a Judgment is limited to $35,000, excluding legal costs or interest. This limit is separate from the amount that may be assessed. Additionally, when a set-off amount is applicable, it is calculated from the assessed amount rather than from the cap upon the court award.
The Law
The 2146100 Ontario Ltd. v. 2052750 Ontario Inc., 2013 ONSC 2483, case confirms the point that the Small Claims Court may assess any sum of damages and may apply from that assessed sum, rather than apply from the monetary jurisdiction cap, an applicable set-off sum so long as the a net Judgment award remains within the court award limit. This basis for applying a set-off was confirmed whereas it was said:
[17] In terms of the case at bar, the respondents expressly set out in their defendants' claim that they were owed over $42,000 from the appellants. They limited their ultimate recovery, however, to $25,000. Whether that limit is arrived at through set-off or abandonment of any sum over and above the monetary jurisdiction of the court is immaterial in my view: see Dunbar v. Helicon Properties Ltd., 2006 CanLII 25262 (ON SCDC), [2006] O.J. No. 2992, 2006 CarswellOnt 4580, 213 O.A.C. 296 (Div. Ct.).
[18] The respondents claimed a judgment of $25,000. They were awarded a judgment of $21,538.85. In my view, the process amounted to nothing more than the trial judge starting at $42,633 and making deductions for amounts owed to the plaintiff, to arrive at a net figure within the monetary jurisdiction of the court. This process is logically no different than assessing the value of a contract at $50,000, determining that $30,000 had been paid under the contract, leaving a balance owing of $20,000. There could be no doubt, in those circumstances, that the deputy judge had the jurisdiction to make a finding that the initial value of the contract was an amount in excess of the monetary limit of the court. But at the end of the day, it is the net judgment that matters. Here, the amount awarded was within the monetary jurisdiction of the Small Claims Court and did not exceed the amount claimed in the defendants' claim.
Within the 2146100 case, the Judge assessed slightly more than $42,000 on a counterclaim as brought against the Plaintiff. The Judge also assessed a sum just over $21,000 on the Plaintiff's Claim as owed by the Defendant. In determining the net award due upon the Judgment, the Judge subtracted the $21,000 as a set-off from the $42,000 assessment rather than from $25,000 limit (at that time). Subsequently on Appeal, the Divisional Court upheld the manner in which the Judgment was calculated by dismissing the Appeal.
Summary Comment
The Small Claims Court monetary jurisdiction limit applies to the amount which the court may award rather than the amount the court may assess. Furthermore, in cases where a set-off calculation is involved, the set-off is taken from the assessed sum rather than from the Small Claims Court limit.
NOTE: A considerable quantity of inquiries featuring “lawyers near me” or “best lawyer in” frequently indicate a pressing requirement for competent legal assistance rather than a specific title of a professional. In Ontario, licensed paralegals are supervised by the same Law Society that governs lawyers, granting them the authority to represent clients in specific litigation matters. Skills in advocacy, legal analysis, and procedural expertise are fundamental to this function. DK Legal Practice provides legal representation within its authorized mandate/scope, focusing on strategic positioning, evidentiary preparation, and persuasive advocacy aimed at securing efficient and favourable resolutions for clients.