Brian Robin Moodie

The appellants (Daimler Chrysler) appealed a summary judgment decision that dismissed their motion to have the actions against them declared statute-barred.

The plaintiffs had relied on a police accident report that incorrectly identified the driver as the owner of the vehicle.

The true owner, Daimler Chrysler, was discovered during examinations for discovery, more than two years after the accident.

The motion judge found that the plaintiffs exercised reasonable diligence and the discoverability principle applied for the Limitations Act claims.

For the Trustee Act claims, the motion judge found special circumstances and no prejudice to the appellants.

The Court of Appeal upheld the motion judge's decision, finding no error in her application of the discoverability principle or the special circumstances test.

The moving party (defendant) in a solicitor's negligence action sought leave to amend his statement of defence to plead an alternative defence of discoverability regarding a missed limitation period for a 2001 motor vehicle accident.

The responding party (plaintiff) opposed the amendment, arguing it would cause irreparable prejudice.

The Master granted the motion, finding that the responding party's evidence of prejudice was insufficient and that any potential prejudice could be compensated by costs.