P. Pooran

The defendants brought a motion for summary judgment to dismiss the plaintiffs' medical malpractice action on the basis that it was statute-barred.

The plaintiffs had previously commenced two identical actions, one of which was dismissed as abandoned.

The court found that the plaintiffs' claim that they discovered the cause of action in September 2011 was inconsistent with their pleadings in the prior action and unsupported by evidence.

Applying the statutory presumption of discoverability, the court concluded the action was commenced beyond the two-year limitation period.

The motion was granted and the action dismissed.

In bankruptcy proceedings concerning the estate of the bankrupt, the court considered two motions: a trustee motion to approve the sale of the estate’s one‑half interest in a residential property to a secured claimant for $25,000, and a creditor’s motion alleging fraud, seeking annulment of the bankruptcy, sanctions against the trustee, and authorization for criminal prosecution under the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act.

The court approved the trustee’s proposed sale, finding the offer commercially reasonable given uncertainty in valuation, litigation risk, and potential costs of partition and sale.

The creditor’s extensive allegations of fraud and misconduct were rejected due to lack of cogent evidence and the court declined to authorize prosecution under s. 205(3) of the Act.

The request to annul the bankruptcy under s. 181 was also dismissed due to delay and insufficient grounds.

The court held that the trustee had acted reasonably in administering the estate and dismissed all claims against it.