Tag: Limitation period

Categories
Firm News

Ian Gold and Sean Murtha to Speak on the Impact of COVID-19 on Litigation in Ontario and Significant Court Decisions

On March 12, 2021, Ian Gold and Sean Murtha will present to the Society of Public Insurance Adjusters of Ontario (“SPIAO”).

Ian and Sean will discuss the procedural and practical impact that the COVID-19 pandemic has had with respect to file handling and the litigation process, including the effect of the temporary suspension of limitation periods, how to schedule virtual assessments of plaintiffs by defence experts, and the transition to remote hearings. They will also go over a number of significant court decisions which have been released over the past year, with a particular emphasis on how those cases impact municipalities and school boards.

Categories
Industry News

Bill 118 and Limitation Periods in the COVID-Era

Ian Gold and Adam Bucci presented on the newly passed Bill 118, the amendments to the Occupiers’ Liability Act, and the state of limitation periods in the COVID-era. Bill 118 has meaningfully changed the Occupiers’ Liability Act by adding certain reporting / notice requirements that claimants must follow if they wish to ultimately commence a lawsuit against an occupier following a slip and fall on snow or ice.

Limitation periods have also been affected as a result of the global pandemic. From March 16th to September 14th, 2020, the limitation clock stopped running. As such, all limitation periods imposed by the Province for claims that encompass this window of time have been extended by 183 days, including those claims whose limitation period ordinarily would not have fallen within that 6-month window.

Categories
TGP Decisions

Chris McCormack wins limitation issues

Chris McCormack was successful on behalf of our client in this preliminary issues hearing addressing limitation issues. The claimant was found to be barred from proceeding with her claim for 10 benefits for failure to commence a proceeding within two years of the insurer’s refusal to pay the amount claimed. Vice-Chair McGee agreed with Adjudicator Neilson’s decision in S.S. v. Certas Home and Auto Insurance Company (18-001196/AABS), and held that it is not within the LAT’s jurisdiction to extend the limitation period under s. 7 of the LAT Act.

Of note, Vice-Chair McGee agreed with Adjudicator Neilson’s decision in S.S. v. Certas Home and Auto Insurance Company (18-001196/AABS), and held that it is not within the LAT’s jurisdiction to extend the limitation period under s. 7 of the LAT Act.

https://www.linkedin.com/posts/tgplawyers_ml-decision-activity-6727309906619244544-hchLL