Randolph B. McNicol

The appellant was injured in a motor vehicle accident.

The respondents' insurer admitted liability and made a settlement offer, but the appellant issued a statement of claim after the two-year limitation period had expired.

The appellant argued that the respondents were estopped from relying on the limitation period or had waived it due to their admission of liability and ongoing negotiations.

The Supreme Court of Canada dismissed the appeal, finding no evidence of a promise not to rely on the limitation period or any waiver by the respondents.

The appellant appealed as of right to the Supreme Court of Canada.

Applying the principles from Collins, Sieben, and Hamill, the Court found no error in the lower court's exercise of its jurisdiction to review the trial judge's finding under section 24(2) of the Charter.

The appeal was dismissed from the bench.

The Motor Transport Board of Manitoba held a show cause hearing regarding complaints that Purolator Courier Limited had contravened its public service vehicle certificates.

Following the hearing, the Board revoked Purolator's existing intra-provincial and extra-provincial authorities and substituted more restrictive ones.

The Manitoba Court of Appeal struck down the Board's order, finding it had exceeded its jurisdiction by focusing on the 'philosophy' of the courier's operations and by amending extra-provincial certificates without proper notice.

The Supreme Court of Canada allowed the Board's appeal, holding that the Board had jurisdiction to amend the certificates based on the established contraventions and that Purolator was not misled regarding the scope of the hearing.