limitation period Tag Archives

Stretching the Limitation Period in Ontario

stretching a limitation period requires more than a broken clock

A couple of recent cases from our Court of Appeal confirm that a limitation period can be stretched beyond the usual two years, but only if it would not be appropriate for a plaintiff to start the legal action earlier. In Ontario, the Limitation Act, 2002 governs the time limits for when a legal action needs to be filed. In most cases the usual rule is that a civil action must be filed within two years of when the event occurred. However, the two-year time frame will not start until the claim is “discovered”.

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.

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.

Todhunter v. Owles, 2015 ONSC 5656

This decision concerns a motion for leave to appeal an order permitting the plaintiff to amend his statement of claim by adding named third parties as defendants after the expiry of the limitation period. The third parties were municipal entities. Leave was not granted.

Kheriji v. 14939201 Ontario Limited et al, 2015 ONSC 5196

Released September 4, 2015 | CanLII This was a motion by the defendant, 14939201 Ontario Limited, to dismiss the plaintiff’s action against it for failure to issue within the limitation period and for summary judgment on the basis that the defendant did not owe a duty of care to the plaintiff. The plaintiff’s action arose from an assault at the Ministry nightclub. The defendant was the owner …