Late disclosure of surveillance evidence, in breach of the defendant’s continuing disclosure obligations, led the trial judge to exclude surveillance evidence both as substantive evidence and for the purpose of impeachment.
Vickers v. Palacious, 2015 CarswellOnt 20889
After the close of the plaintiff’s case, during which the plaintiff filed the reports of two radiologists, the trial judge denied the defendant’s request for a ruling permitting it to cross-examine the radiologists.
Richards v. Sun Life Assurance Company of Canada, 2016 ONSC 5492
In an action for disability benefits, a plaintiff does not get the benefit of a rolling limitation period because the material facts upon which the action rests will have arisen at the time the plaintiff alleges that he or she first became entitled to periodic payments and it would be unfair to require the insurer to litigate those facts for a potentially unlimited period of time.
Baradaran v. Alexanian 2016 ONCA 533
The Court of Appeal confirmed that it is inappropriate to treat a motion to strike portions of a Statement of Claim as a summary judgment motion by examining evidence on the merits of the action.
Wong v. Salivan Landscape Ltd., 2016 ONSC 4183
The limitation period against a security firm contracted to perform winter maintenance at a condominium property did not begin to run before the plaintiff had actual knowledge of the security firm’s responsibility. Plaintiff’s counsel’s property searches, notice letters and reliance on information obtained from the property owner constituted due diligence.
Brown v. Baum, 2016 ONCA 325
The Ontario Court of Appeal held that, in circumstances where the plaintiff’s doctor continued to treat the plaintiff and engage in good faith efforts to remediate damage, the plaintiff did not know that it was appropriate to start an action against the doctor until after the last surgery proved unsuccessful.