issue requiring a trial if the summary judgment process provides her with the evidence required to fairly and justly adjudicate the dispute and is a timely, affordable and proportionate procedure. Not all motions for summary judgment will require a motion for directions. However, failure to bring such a motion where it was evident that the record would be complex or voluminous may be considered when dealing with costs consequences. Absent an error of law, the exercise of powers under the new summary judgment rule attracts deference. She also gave a rebuke to judges who expressed concern that the increased use of summary judgment would lead to more crowded dockets: Impact While the original trial became complicated and spawned multiple appeals, the guidance given by the SCC has been welcomed as "useful" and "should give trial judges a greater sense of comfort when they attempt to simplify proceedings." It has also been noted that the SCC has granted a wide berth for summary judgment determinations with limited ability to appeal. In fact, the Court criticized the Court of Appeal for not going far enough in its ruling, which placed too much emphasis on the benefits of a conventional trial. The fact that judges' decisions will attract considerable deference on appeal means that parties are well-advised to "put their best foot forward" in responding to a motion. As the Court of Appeal stated in an earlier case, "a respondent on a motion for summary judgment must lead trump or risk losing." Further reading Alderson, David (2018). "Sentinels of the Hryniak Culture Shift: Four Years On". In Archibald, Todd L., Annual Review of Civil Litigation 2018. Toronto, Carswell. . Alderson, David (2021). "Emerging Burdens of the Summary Judgment Motion Judge". In Archibald, Todd L., Annual Review of Civil Litigation 2021. Toronto, Carswell. ISBN 978-1-7319-0858-2 Notes References Supreme Court of Canada cases 2014 in Canadian case law Canadian civil procedure case law