{"id":690,"date":"2018-03-02T19:39:24","date_gmt":"2018-03-02T23:39:24","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/limitations.ca\/?p=690"},"modified":"2018-03-02T19:39:24","modified_gmt":"2018-03-02T23:39:24","slug":"ontario-appealing-s-5-analyses","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/limitations.ca\/?p=690","title":{"rendered":"Ontario: Appealing s. 5 analyses"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><a href=\"http:\/\/canlii.ca\/t\/hnxnm\" target=\"_blank\"><em>Nicholson v. McDougall <\/em><\/a>is a reminder that the omission of a <a href=\"https:\/\/www.ontario.ca\/laws\/statute\/02l24#BK6\" target=\"_blank\">s. 5<\/a> analysis isn&#8217;t necessarily a ground for appeal:<\/p>\n<blockquote>\n<p class=\"Mainparagraph\">[<a class=\"paragAnchor\" name=\"par31\"><\/a>31]\u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0There is no reference to s. 5 at all, or any of its detailed requirements, in the Reasons for Decision.\u00a0 I agree with the respondent that this omission from the Reasons for Decision is not sufficient to grant this appeal.\u00a0 The Deputy Judge could have implicitly applied s. 5, including the presumption in s. 5(2), without expressly referring to it.\u00a0 To assess whether the Deputy Judge did so and therefore complied with the\u00a0<i>Limitations Act<\/i>\u00a0requirements, I begin with the law regarding s. 5(2) and then I will move to how it applies in this case.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Nicholson v. McDougall is a reminder that the omission of a s. 5 analysis isn&#8217;t necessarily a ground for appeal: [31]\u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0There is no reference to s. 5 at all, or any of its detailed requirements, in the Reasons for Decision.\u00a0 I agree with the respondent that this omission from the Reasons for &hellip; <a href=\"https:\/\/limitations.ca\/?p=690\" class=\"more-link\">Continue reading <span class=\"screen-reader-text\">Ontario: Appealing s. 5 analyses<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[4],"tags":[415,65,9,23,303],"class_list":["post-690","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-ontario","tag-appeal","tag-appeals","tag-discovery","tag-ontario-act-s-5","tag-ontario-divisional-court"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/limitations.ca\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/690","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/limitations.ca\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/limitations.ca\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/limitations.ca\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/limitations.ca\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=690"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/limitations.ca\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/690\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":691,"href":"https:\/\/limitations.ca\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/690\/revisions\/691"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/limitations.ca\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=690"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/limitations.ca\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=690"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/limitations.ca\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=690"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}