In this recent decision, the Divisional Court overturned a previous Preliminary Issue Decision and Reconsideration Decision of the Licence Appeal Tribunal (“LAT”) that stated that an applicant was statute-barred from adjudicating entitlements to Non-Earner Benefits (“NEB”) due to the two-year limitation period…
Further clarity about limitation periods in CAT cases….
Limitation period starts to run not from the date of CAT designation, but from the date benefits claimed for, based on that designation, are denied.
The decision of Lee v. Castro et al. serves as an important reminder on the strict application of limitation periods, particularly when it comes to the discoverability doctrine.
A plaintiff is obliged to exercise reasonable diligence to secure the name of a doctor who may have participated in negligent care to satisfy the requirements of the Limitations Act.
Clarke v. Sun Life Assurance Company of Canada is an appeal decision following a summary judgment motion on the issue of whether or not the plaintiff sued her Long-Term Disability (LTD) carrier within the limitation period.
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”.
