In Lyall v. Whitehead the court denied summary judgment on a limitations defence because it would only partially dispose of the action. The limitations defence was not readily bifurcated from the merits. This gave rise to the potential for duplicative… Continue Reading
The Court of Appeal’s decision Bertolli v. Toronto (City) is an example of a plaintiff failing to satisfy the litigation finger test in a misnomer matter. The court found that the correct defendant would not have known on reading the… Continue Reading
It’s time for some limitations pedantry! In Corona Steel Industry Private Ltd. V. Integrity Worldwide Inc., the court held that “an action for recognition and enforcement of a foreign judgment is treated as an action upon a simple contract for… Continue Reading
The Court of Appeal in Prescott & Russell (United Counties) v. David S. Laflamme clarifies some interesting aspects of motions for to add a defendant after the presumptive expiry of the limitation period. The motion judge held that the plaintiff… Continue Reading
The Court of Appeal’s decision in Mancinelli v. Royal Bank of Canada is now a leading decision on the addition of a defendant to proceeding after the presumptive expiry of the limitation period. The Court set out the test, and… Continue Reading
In Brozmanova v. Tarshis, the Court of Appeal has brought certainty to the question of whether a defendant may advance a limitations defence in a r. 21.01(1)(a) motion. The answer is no. Rule 21.01(1)(a) is for the determination of questions of… Continue Reading
Davies v. Davies Smith Developments Partnership is another decision from the Court of Appeal that delineates when a proceeding will be an appropriate remedy for a plaintiff’s loss. The defendant’s lack of funds to satisfy its debt to the plaintiff did… Continue Reading
When the Motor Vehicle Accident Claims Fund obtains an assignment of a passenger’s judgment against the vehicle’s owner, is the Fund obliged to bring an action against the owner’s insurer within the one year limitation period in s. 258(2)… Continue Reading
Bergen v. Fast Estate is a reminder from the Court of Appeal that in a summary judgment motion on a limitations defence, the plaintiff needs to put her best evidentiary foot forward, or lose: [11] In response to Aviva’s motion… Continue Reading
How does s. 18 of the Limitations Act apply when a party seeks contribution and indemnity in regards of claims pursued in separate proceedings commenced on different dates? The decision in Berwick v. Samis and Kozmik provides the perhaps obvious answer. … Continue Reading