In Pintea v Johns, the Supreme Court of Canada endorses the Principles established by the Canadian Judicial Council (CJC) regarding self-represented litigants (Statement of Principles on Self-Represented Litigants and Accused Persons, henceforth the CJC Principles). These Principles outline the obligations and responsibilities owed by judges to SRLs and the obligations and responsibilities of SRLs when they participate in the court process. The Principles acknowledge the disadvantage SRLs are at in navigating the complexities of the legal system on their own and often facing counsel on the other side, and exhort judges to take this into consideration in managing cases and rendering decisions. Specifically, Pintea addressed the application of the law of contempt to an SRL and held that the individual in question, who was self-represented, could not be held in contempt of an order if he was not made aware of that order.
As of October 2018, 38 cases reported in our source database (Westlaw) have referenced the Pintea decision in some way. We took a look at how these cases were decided, and how they applied or distinguished Pintea and the CJC Principles