As a criminal case moves toward trial in Ontario, it will often pass through a step called a judicial pretrial conference, commonly shortened to JPT. This is a meeting involving a judge, the Crown, and defence counsel, held before the trial itself, and it plays an important role in how efficiently and fairly a case ultimately proceeds. This guide explains what a judicial pretrial generally involves, who typically attends, and how it differs from other pretrial conversations in a case. It is general information only and not legal advice about a specific case.
The term "pretrial" is used loosely in everyday conversation to describe several different things that happen before a trial, which can cause confusion. This page focuses specifically on the judicial pretrial conference, a distinct process involving a judge, and distinguishes it from informal resolution discussions between the Crown and defence, which are covered in a separate guide.
What Is a Judicial Pretrial Conference?
A judicial pretrial conference is a meeting, generally held before a judge, in which the Crown and defence counsel discuss the case ahead of a scheduled trial. It is a formal step recognized in Ontario's rules of criminal procedure and is used across both the Ontario Court of Justice and the Superior Court of Justice, with some differences in practice between the two levels of court. The discussion is generally more informal than a courtroom hearing, often held in a judge's chambers or by way of a scheduled conference, rather than in open court.
The Purpose of a Judicial Pretrial
Judicial pretrials serve several practical purposes in the life of a criminal case. They generally aim to:
- Narrow the issues that will actually need to be argued or decided at trial, so that time in court is not spent on matters that are not genuinely in dispute.
- Discuss the trial estimate, meaning how long a trial is realistically expected to take, which helps the court schedule cases efficiently and avoid conflicts.
- Explore whether a resolution is possible, sometimes with a judge offering a general, non-binding view on the case, which can prompt further resolution discussions between counsel.
- Discuss anticipated legal issues, such as expected Charter applications or other pretrial motions, so the court and parties can plan for how and when those issues will be argued.
By addressing these issues in advance, a judicial pretrial can help make the eventual trial, if one proceeds, more efficient and can reduce the risk of unexpected delays once trial begins.
Who Typically Attends
A judicial pretrial generally involves a judge, Crown counsel, and defence counsel. In the Ontario Court of Justice, practice guidance generally indicates that only the Crown and licensed defence representatives, or an unrepresented accused person, should attend. In the Superior Court of Justice, the applicable rules of criminal procedure address attendance somewhat more formally.
Does the Accused Attend?
Whether an accused person personally attends a judicial pretrial generally depends on the level of court and whether the person is represented by a lawyer. In the Superior Court of Justice, an accused person who is represented by counsel that has filed the required designation is generally not required to personally attend the judicial pretrial, though a judge retains discretion to require the accused's attendance if it is considered necessary in a particular case. An unrepresented accused, by contrast, is generally required to personally attend and be prepared to make commitments on the issues expected to arise. Practice can vary between courthouses and between the Ontario Court of Justice and the Superior Court, so it is worth confirming the specific expectation with defence counsel or, for a self-represented person, with court staff, well before the scheduled date.
Confidentiality and Without-Prejudice Discussions
Discussions at a judicial pretrial are generally treated as confidential and without prejudice. This means that positions taken, or views expressed, during the conference are not generally repeated to, or relied upon by, the trial judge, and the judge who conducts the judicial pretrial is generally not the same judge who later presides over the trial itself, if the matter does not resolve. This separation is intended to allow for candid, exploratory conversation at the pretrial stage without it affecting how the case is later tried.
Because judicial pretrial discussions are confidential and generally do not bind the eventual trial judge, they are a useful space to explore issues and possible resolutions candidly. A lawyer can advise on what is realistic to raise at this stage in a specific case.
How a JPT Differs From Resolution Discussions
It is easy to confuse a judicial pretrial with the informal resolution discussions that happen directly between the Crown and defence. The key difference is the presence of a judge. Resolution discussions are negotiations between counsel alone, without a judge involved, and can happen at essentially any point in a case. A judicial pretrial specifically involves a judge and is a more formal step tied to the trial-scheduling process. In practice, the two are connected: issues or positions explored at a judicial pretrial often lead to further resolution discussions between counsel afterward, and ongoing resolution discussions can shape what gets raised at the judicial pretrial itself.
What Happens at a Judicial Pretrial
The specific content of a judicial pretrial varies by case, but it generally includes a discussion of the anticipated evidence and witnesses, any legal issues expected to arise, such as a possible Charter application, and how long the parties expect the trial to take if the matter proceeds. The judge may ask questions of both counsel and may share a general impression of the case, without making any binding ruling. Nothing said by the judge at this stage commits the eventual trial judge to any particular outcome or approach.
When a Judicial Pretrial Happens
A judicial pretrial is generally scheduled once a trial date is set or approaching, though the specific timing depends on the courthouse and the complexity of the case. More than one judicial pretrial can occur in a single case, particularly for more complex matters or where earlier issues remain unresolved. Scheduling a judicial pretrial with adequate lead time before trial is generally considered good practice, since it allows any issues identified to be addressed before the trial date itself.
Preparing for a Judicial Pretrial
Defence counsel generally prepares for a judicial pretrial by reviewing the disclosure, considering what legal issues might genuinely be in dispute, and discussing with the client, in advance, what outcomes might be acceptable if a resolution is realistically possible. See our guide to disclosure for more on this earlier step. For a self-represented accused person who must personally attend, it is particularly important to understand, ahead of time, the issues likely to be discussed and to consider getting at least a single consultation with a lawyer beforehand; see our guide to getting legal advice.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the difference between a judicial pretrial and a resolution discussion?
A judicial pretrial involves a judge along with Crown and defence counsel, while resolution discussions are negotiations directly between the Crown and defence, without a judge present.
Do I have to attend my own judicial pretrial?
It depends. A represented accused in the Superior Court is generally not required to attend personally, while a self-represented accused is generally required to attend. Practice can vary, so confirm with your lawyer or the courthouse.
Is what is said at a judicial pretrial used against me at trial?
Judicial pretrial discussions are generally treated as confidential and without prejudice, and the judge conducting the conference is generally not the same judge who presides at trial.
Can a case be resolved at a judicial pretrial?
A judicial pretrial can prompt or advance a resolution, including by exploring the issues with a judge's general input, but the actual negotiation of terms generally happens through resolution discussions between counsel.
How many judicial pretrials can happen in one case?
There is no fixed limit. More complex cases, or cases where issues remain unresolved, may involve more than one judicial pretrial conference before trial.
Does a judicial pretrial delay my trial date?
A judicial pretrial is generally scheduled as part of the process leading up to trial, not as a separate delay, and is intended to make the eventual trial more efficient rather than to postpone it.