Anyone can sue anyone for anything at anytime. However, not every case will stick. The assessment of every small claim depends on the circumstances, of course. Nevertheless, there are always several central elements to establish for a small claim to be successful. We always look to these elements when people come to us looking to sue someone. So, without further ado. In any Small Claims Court case, to be successful, the plaintiff must firmly establish:

• Wrongdoing
• Damages, and, in some cases,
• Causation,
• Mitigation of damages.

Let’s illustrate with a situation where a woman went for a swim in her condominium’s pool and, the next day, caught a cold. She believes that this is because the water in the pool was too cold and wants to sue the condominium. Now, let’s see how the above elements apply to her situation.

Wrongdoing

First, and perhaps predictably, the defendant must have done something wrong. Typically, the defendant must have caused a breach of a contract or committed a tort. Torts encompass a wide variety of wrongdoings and include things like negligence and intentional wrongdoings: defamation or “trespass to chattel” (interference with someone else’s lawful possession of property), etc.

Causation 

• To establish causation, the plaintiff must show that his or her troubles or damages were, indeed, the direct fault of the defendant.
• If the plaintiff can’t establish causation, the plaintiff has no claim. But, sometimes, causation is clear. For example, the defendant borrowed and never returned money from the plaintiff.
• Other times, however, causation is not so apparent. In the event of the pool, causation is rather difficult to establish. There’s no sure way to tell that the cold resulted from the pool. It could be a result of any number of things. Causation could, perhaps, be established by a doctor’s report. However, the defendant may indeed challenge such a report.

Damages

If the plaintiff established causation, there is still the matter of establishing damages and their amount. Even if the defendant did something wrong to you, you must still show that this wrong resulted in some objective monetary loss or suffering.

Valuation of Damages

• The plaintiff can claim all kinds of damages based on contract law, tort law and more.
• In all cases, the plaintiff must show that damages did occur. Also, they must be assessed reasonably, and there should be evidence to support them.
• For example, if a contractor did faulty work in your home, you can, of course, sue him for the amount of the repair. First, however, you must prove that the work was, indeed, faulty. In addition, you need to provide evidence of the cost of repair.
• Practically, this means providing, for example, photos and/or an inspection report that shows deficiencies of the work and a quote for repair from another contractor.
• In the case of the unfortunate lady with a cold, it’s difficult to show what damages she suffered and how much they can be. First, objectively estimating the physical suffering associated with a cold is difficult. Second, any estimates are likely to be very small since a cold is a common and relatively mild ailment. Perhaps the lady missed two days of work. However,  to claim compensation for lost wages, we must consider the third element.

Mitigation of Damages

• This notion prescribes that the plaintiff must do everything possible to reduce his or her damages and not escalate them needlessly.
• Consider a situation where a commercial tenant (a business) spontaneously moved out of an office, breaking a contract with the landlord. The landlord, therefore, lost rent money when the property was without a tenant.
• In this event, the tenant is liable to the landlord for any rent money that the landlord can’t collect between when the original tenant moved out, and a new one moved in.
• However, the landlord must mitigate damages. This means that the landlord can’t sit there with no tenant. The landlord must actively seek another tenant to make sure that another business moves in as soon as possible. The landlord’s purpose should be to lose as little money as possible.
• If the tenant can show that the landlord made no effort to seek another tenant, the landlord’s claim may be significantly reduced.

If we accept that the lady with the cold got the cold because of the pool, misses three days of work, and asks the condo to compensate her wages, there is still the question of mitigation. Did she need to miss three days of work? Maybe she only had to miss one, or two, or none at all. If the judge isn’t satisfied that she needed to miss three days of work due to her cold, her claim will be partially or entirely unsuccessful.

Please don’t hesitate to contact us if you need help and representation in your case.