Latest News Articles

Ms. Pashkiewich brings this motion to add Pave-Tar Construction Ltd. as a defendant to this action after the expiry of the putative limitation period.  Pave-Tar opposes the relief sought. Ms. Pashkiewich relies on section 5(1)(b) of the Limitations Act, 2002, S.O. 2002, c.24, Schedule B to argue that the limitation period did not begin to run until 8 September 2017, the date the City of Toronto advised her lawyer that the City had a winter maintenance contract with Pave-Tar.  She argues that she did not discover the existence of Pave-Tar or its potential role until that date and could not have discovered the identity of Pave-Tar with reasonable diligence before that date.

https://www.deutschmannlaw.com/blog/post/applicant-fails-to-take-reasonable-steps-to-determined-information-limitation-period-expired-ms-pashkiewich-v-city-of-toronto