The moving party sought an order validating late service of a statement of claim and extending time for service after the claim was served more than two years after issuance and beyond the six‑month service period under the Rules of Civil Procedure.
The court considered the factors governing extensions of time and validation of service, including length of delay, explanation for delay, and prejudice to the responding party.
The claim had been issued after the expiry of the limitation period and the moving party failed to provide a coherent explanation for the delay or evidence supporting discoverability.
The court found extensive and unexplained delays attributable to counsel, inadequate efforts to locate and serve the defendant, and significant prejudice to the defence including loss of opportunities for surveillance, medical assessments, and vocational evaluation.
The motion to validate service and extend time was dismissed.
