The defendants moved for summary judgment to dismiss the plaintiff's subrogated action, arguing it was statute-barred under the Limitations Act, 2002, having been commenced more than two years after a fire and explosion.
The plaintiff, through its insurer Intact, contended that the claim was not discovered until the Ontario Fire Marshal's report identified the cause as arson.
The court found Intact's evidence regarding its due diligence in investigating the claim to be significantly lacking, relying on hearsay.
Despite the evidentiary deficiencies, the court, applying the enhanced powers under Rule 20, ordered a mini-trial to determine the issue of Intact's reasonable diligence in discovering the claim, emphasizing the need for a fair and just adjudication and the unique circumstances of pending official investigations.