The plaintiff brought motions seeking nunc pro tunc orders deeming two actions to have been commenced within the limitation period.
Although the originating processes and fees were delivered to the court office on the final day of the limitation period, they were not issued because counsel attempted to file them by courier rather than by personal attendance as required by the Rules of Civil Procedure.
The registrar returned the materials by mail, and the claims were formally issued after the limitation period expired.
The court held that the failure to comply with the procedural requirement constituted an irregularity capable of being cured, as the documents were in the registrar’s office on the relevant date and there was no prejudice to the defendants.
A nunc pro tunc order deeming the actions commenced on the limitation date was granted to permit the matters to proceed on their merits.
