In Craven v. Osidacz, the plaintiff asked the court to fix costs for a motion heard in 2010. The defendant objected based on an expired limitation period. The Superior Court held that no limitation period applies to a request to… Continue Reading
In T.L. v. Ottawa Police Services et al., the Superior Court found that a plaintiff’s action could not shelter within the s. 16(1)(h.1) exception to the application of the limitation period because the defendant did not owe her a private law… Continue Reading
The Superior Court decision in Zenner v. Hermanns reminds us that patience will not delay discovery of a claim: [40] Zenner’s explanation that he was a “patient” person is not an adequate, or appropriate, response. Patience may well be a virtue,… Continue Reading
In Fercan Developments Inc. v. Canada (Attorney General), the Court of Appeal emphasizes the factual nature of the s. 5(1)(a)(iv) analysis. The decision is also an example of an appeal in related proceedings impacting on appropriateness. The AGC brought an… Continue Reading
The Superior Court decision in Yorke et al. v. Harris considers the time-bar in s. 8(2) of the Municipal Conflict of Interest Act. Technically, this isn’t a limitation period, but in case you’ve come here looking for one of the very… Continue Reading
The Superior Court decision in Dealer’s Choice Preferred Collision Centre Inc. v. Kircher is noteworthy as an example of a party failing to establish the litigation finger test: [19] For these reasons, I conclude that the defendants, on receiving and… Continue Reading
Ramoutar v. Ramoutar considers whether to grant an extension of the limitation period in s. 7(3) of the Family Law Act pursuant to s. 2(8). It’s a worth a review if you have a family law practice.
Khan v. Taji confirms that common law discovery applies to the limitation period in s. 4 of the Real Property Limitations Act. It provides a good overview of the issue: [72] The defendants argue that the discoverability principle in s. 5 of… Continue Reading
In Sharma v. Sandhu, the Divisional Court held that the common law discovery rule has no application to s. 57 of the Residential Tenancies Act: [19] I am also not persuaded that the common law principle of discoverability… Continue Reading
In Vellenga v. Boersma, the Court of Appeal provides a reminder that you raise a limitations defence for the first time on appeal at your peril: [41] Finally, the appellants argue that Mr. Vellenga’s claim was statute-barred under s. 4 of the Real… Continue Reading