Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 14 MARCH 2025

Limitation Periods: Ultimate Edition: The Impact Of Huether v. Sharpe, 2025 ONCA 140

McCague Borlack LLP
Explore more from McCague Borlack LLP

Since 2002 when the (then new) Limitations Act 2002 (the "Act") came into being, there was a section looming, spoken of in only hushed tones by members of the bar: The Ultimate Limitation Period.

CanadaLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration
Eric Turkienicz
Eric Turkienicz
Author LinkedIn connections

Since 2002 when the (then new) Limitations Act 2002 (the "Act") came into being, there was a section looming, spoken of in only hushed tones by members of the bar: The Ultimate Limitation Period. By operation of a combination of provisions within the Act, this 15-year bar on claims would only become applicable as of 2019, at the earliest. Indeed, the Ontario Court of Appeal explicitly overturned a lower court decision to the contrary soon after the enactment of the Act.1

And so, lawyers sat and waited to see what the courts would say once this section would begin to be tested and claims became barred under it. They waited 15+ years...

This brings us to the recently decided case of Huether v. Sharpe which, while by no means the first decision on the ultimate limitation period, provides some interesting insight and clarification on when it applies.

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

Register for freeORLog in

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

View source

Related Articles

Legal Intelligence Newsletters: sign up for the latest legal and regulatory news on your chosen topics

Read more about

Related Comparative Guides

See more popular content from

Article

The Coldcard Exploit: Why Victims May Have Two Routes To Recovery

A five-year-old firmware defect in Coldcard hardware wallets has enabled attackers to systematically drain an estimated $116 million in Bitcoin from over 5,200 victims since July 2026. This unprecedented exploit raises critical questions about manufacturer liability and creates two distinct legal pathways for recovery: blockchain tracing against the perpetrators and potential litigation against Canadian manufacturer Coinkite for product defects that undermined the fundamental security promise of devices mar
CanadaLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration
WeirFoulds LLP
WeirFoulds LLP
Article

Plaintiffs Awarded A Total Of $800,000 In Damages For Defamation (Murdy v. Barrette)

A Canadian court awarded $800,000 in damages to a couple defamed by serious false allegations of sexual assault and criminal misconduct spread through social media. The case examines how factors like the severity of accusations, use of social media platforms, and a defendant's failure to mount a defense can dramatically escalate defamation damages beyond typical awards.
CanadaLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration
Gardiner Roberts LLP
Gardiner Roberts LLP
Article

Ontario’s New AI Rules: What Lawyers And Expert Witnesses Need To Know

Ontario's Rules of Civil Procedure now include strict amendments requiring lawyers and expert witnesses to certify the authenticity of every citation and authority used in court materials. These new anti-hallucination provisions impose significant penalties for presenting AI-generated fabricated authorities, fundamentally shifting accountability for artificial intelligence use in litigation.
CanadaLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration
Soloway Wright
Soloway Wright
Article

Not Beyond Reproach: Alberta Court Confirms Jurisdiction Over Alberta Energy Regulator

The Alberta Court of King's Bench has confirmed its jurisdiction to grant injunctive relief against the Alberta Energy Regulator despite a broadly worded statutory privative clause. This landmark decision, arising from Sumerian Oil & Gas's application to stay a suspension order affecting approximately 900 wells, represents one of the first considerations of the Supreme Court of Canada's recent Democracy Watch ruling and may significantly impact future disputes involving AER orders.
CanadaLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration
MLT Aikins LLP
MLT Aikins LLP
Article

Copyright Claims on Intellectual Work Property: Employee vs Employer

When a senior software developer secretly creates competing software on his own time, who owns the copyright? The Ontario Court of Appeal's decision in Nexus Solutions Inc. v. Krougly clarifies the boundaries of employer ownership over employee-created work, establishing that broad job descriptions alone cannot secure intellectual property rights without clear contractual terms or direct involvement in the creation process.
CanadaIntellectual Property
McCague Borlack LLP
McCague Borlack LLP