The Court of Appeal decision in Morrison v. Barzo sets out in detail the test for adding a party to a proceeding after the presumptive expiry of the limitation period. It’s now the leading decision on the subject. To obtain… Continue Reading
The Court of Appeal decision in Majewsky v. Veveris restates two real property principles: Adverse passion can be established with respect to lands registered under the Land Titles Act by possession meeting the necessary requirements during any continuous ten-year period… Continue Reading
Master Short’s decision in Frederica Mitchell v. John Doe is notable for its comprehensive summary of misnomer principles. So too is Master Short’s decision in Livska v. Molina . It’s an example of the circumstances where the court grants misnomer… Continue Reading
Nothern Bruce Peninsula (Municipality) v. Dolson considers the limitation period in s. 36(8) of the Building Code Act for proceedings under that Act. I don’t think it’s technically a civil limitations issues, and I’ve never encountered it before. Still,… Continue Reading
The decision in Shannon v. Hrabovsky follows Leibel for the principle that the Limitations Act applies to will challenges: [63] As I understand the analysis in Leibel v. Leibel, because a will is effective as of the date of death,… Continue Reading
The Court of Appeal’s decision in Fehr v. Sun Life Assurance Company of Canada is noteworthy for it its emphasis on the contextual nature of the discovery analysis: [173] However, when it came to assessing the limitation period defences applicable to… Continue Reading
The Court of Appeal in its decision Nasr Hospitality Services Inc. v. Intact Insurance has held that, at least in the circumstances of the case, the limitation period for a coverage action commences presumptively on the date the insured gives… Continue Reading
The Court of Appeal decision in Gillham v. Lake of Bays (Township) is noteworthy for two reasons. First, it uses the concept of the “claim” (which is the language of the Limitations Act) rather than the concept of the “cause of… Continue Reading
In Coveley v. Thorsteinssons LLP, the plaintiffs sued their former lawyers for negligently prosecuting tax appeals. The defendant lawyers moved for summary judgment dismissing the claim as statute-barred. The court refused to accept the plaintiffs’ s. 5(1)(a)(iv) appropriateness argument that… Continue Reading
Aragon (Wellesley) Development (Ontario) Corp. v. Piller Investements Ltd. will be useful to the real property bar for its summary of the effect of the Land Titles Act on possessory and prescriptive rights (starting at para. 122), abandonment of easements… Continue Reading