Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 02 AUGUST 2021

"Plausible Inference" Test Affirms That Plaintiffs Must Exercise Reasonable Diligence To Discover Claims

Gardiner Roberts LLP
Gardiner Roberts LLP
Contributor
Explore more from Gardiner Roberts LLP

Grant Thornton prepared an unqualified auditors' report in which it confirmed that it had reviewed the borrowers' financial statements in accordance with "Generally Accepted Auditing Standards."

CanadaLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration

In Grant Thornton LLP v. New Brunswick, 2021 SCC 31 (CanLII), the Supreme Court of Canada determined that a claim by the Province of New Brunswick against Grant Thornton LLP was statute-barred as the government had discovered or ought to have discovered the material facts giving rise to the claim before the two-year limitation period expired. The decision affirmed two cornerstones of limitations periods:

  1. A limitation period is triggered when the plaintiff discovers or ought to have discovered through the exercise of reasonable diligence the material facts on which the claim is based (para. 40); and
  2. A claim is discovered when a plaintiff has knowledge, actual or constructive, of the material facts upon which a plausible inference of liability on the defendant's part can be drawn (para. 42).

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.

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.

See more popular content from