Skip to content

Brought to you by

Dentons logo

Limitations Law Blog

Updates on key developments on laws involving limitation periods in Ontario.

open menu close menu

Limitations Law Blog

  • Home
  • About us

A plaintiff cannot rely on its own inaction to toll a limitation period

By Dentons Limitations Law Group
November 11, 2016
  • Discoverability
Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share via email Share on LinkedIn

The decision in Krates Keswick Inc. v Brian Miller, 2016 ONSC 6467 speaks to the inability of a plaintiff to toll the discoverability of a potential action as a result of its own inaction. 

A receiver for Crate Marine Sales Limited was appointed under the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act. The receiver subsequently commenced this action (which was subsequently transferred to its affiliates Krates Keswick Inc. “KKI“) in respect of arrears for the payments of goods and services provided by the plaintiff to the defendant from 2007 to 2014. The defenant brought a motion for partial summary judgment on the basis that KKI is barred by the application of the two-year limitation period in the Limitations Act, 2002 from bringing this action for payment of invoices issued before March 30, 2013 (i.e. more than two years before the commencement of this action).

An accounts receivevable statement was provided by the receiver to the defendant. The A/R statement showed that no payments were made towards any of the 2007-2012 invoices, except for two invoices in respect of which part payments were made. KKI argued that the claims against the defendant were not discoverable because the company’s accounting records were kept in “an extreme state of disarray” and thus, the limitations period should be tolled. There was no case law to support this position. The motions judge held that keeping poor accounting records is no justification for tolling the limitation period. Further, the motions judge stated that if the plaintiff company was unaware of the payments being made to it, then it should have acted on collecting what it believed to be unpaid invoices. The motions judge granted the defendant partial summary judgment had found that the plaintiffknew or ought to have known that the requirements of s. 5(1)(a) of the Limitations Act had been satisfied at the end of 2012.

Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share via email Share on LinkedIn
Subscribe and stay updated
Receive our latest blog posts by email.
Stay in Touch
Dentons Limitations Law Group

About Dentons Limitations Law Group

The Limitations Law Blog contains summaries of the latest developments arising from appellate and lower court decisions on limitations law in Ontario. Subscribe today and be one of the first to receive our insights on recent limitations law developments in Ontario.

All posts

RELATED POSTS

  • Attempted Resolution
  • Discoverability
  • Tolling/Varying Agreements

Hamilton (City) v. Metcalfe & Mansfield Capital Corp., 2012 ONCA 156 (Discoverability and Tolling Agreements)

By Dentons Limitations Law Group
  • Discoverability

Limitation Periods and Singular Discrete Oppressive Acts

By Ara Basmadjian
  • Discoverability

No Duty on Insurers to Advise Insured of running Limitation Period

By Dentons Limitations Law Group

About Dentons

Dentons is designed to be different. As the world’s largest law firm with 20,000 professionals in over 200 locations in more than 80 countries, we can help you grow, protect, operate and finance your business. Our polycentric and purpose-driven approach, together with our commitment to inclusion, diversity, equity and ESG, ensures we challenge the status quo to stay focused on what matters most to you. www.dentons.com

Dentons boilerplate image

Twitter

Categories

  • Acknowledgment
  • Adding a Party
  • Amending Pleadings
  • Attempted Resolution
  • Contribution and Indemnity
  • COVID-19
  • Demand Obligations
  • Discoverability
  • Enforcement of Foreign Judgments
  • General
  • Limitation Periods contained in "Other Acts"
  • Limitation Periods in Federal Court
  • Misnomer
  • Motions to Strike
  • Notable cases in other provinces
  • Special Circumstances
  • Statutory Variation of Time Limits
  • Successors
  • Tolling/Varying Agreements
  • Transitional Provisions
  • Ultimate Limitation Periods

Subscribe and stay updated

Receive our latest blog posts by email.

Stay in Touch

Dentons logo

© 2023 Dentons

  • Legal notices
  • Privacy policy
  • Terms of use
  • Cookies on this site