This is general information, not legal advice, and reflects Ontario law as of September 22, 2026.
What the Superior Court's civil AI rule actually covers
Part J(12) of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice's Consolidated Civil Provincial Practice Direction sets out the AI-use rules for civil filings: verify any AI-sourced legal information against a trusted, authoritative source; where a factum is filed, include a statement signed by the lawyer certifying that every authority cited in it is authentic; and hyperlink cited cases to a public source such as CanLII wherever available. The direction states its own scope plainly — civil proceedings across the province, with Divisional Court and Small Claims Court named as the two exceptions.
Why the exclusion is worth noticing
Small Claims Court doesn't run on the Rules of Civil Procedure the rest of the civil practice direction assumes — it uses its own simplified Rules of the Small Claims Court, and parties file a Plaintiff's Claim and Defence, not a factum. The signed-certification mechanic the practice direction builds around has no equivalent document to attach to there, a plausible practical reason for the carve-out even though the Court's own materials state the exclusion without explaining it. The two named exceptions aren't equivalent, either: Divisional Court carries its own separate AI-related wording in its own Consolidated Practice Direction. Small Claims Court has no comparable AI-specific document of its own.
What still applies without a court-specific rule
A missing court-level practice direction doesn't erase a licensee's underlying duties. The Law Society of Ontario's generative-AI guidance binds every lawyer and paralegal regardless of venue — the same verification and competence obligations that apply in Superior Court apply to a paralegal drafting a Plaintiff's Claim, just without this specific direction's signed-certification and hyperlink mechanics attached. See our breakdown of the LSO's generative-AI guidance for what that layer actually requires.
Venue can also change mid-file: a Small Claims decision appealed to Divisional Court moves into a venue that does carry its own AI wording, so the applicable rule shifts with the appeal — the same file may later carry the discovery-review and settlement-tracking workflow a higher-court civil matter would use. DROZlegal's litigation drafting tools hyperlink every cited authority to its live source as a draft is generated, regardless of which court's rule technically requires it — a lawyer still verifies and signs off, every time. See our breakdown of LTB and HRTO AI disclosure for a related scope question outside the court system entirely.