The plaintiffs owned a fashion boutique insured by the defendant.
After a loss, the plaintiffs sued the defendant more than one year but less than two years after the incident.
The defendant moved for summary judgment, arguing the action was barred by a one-year limitation period in the insurance contract.
The motion judge dismissed the motion, finding the contractual provision did not override the two-year statutory limitation period under the Limitations Act, 2002, and that the contract was not a 'business agreement'.
The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal, holding that the policy clearly provided for a one-year limitation period, the provision effectively overrode the statutory period under s. 22 of the Limitations Act, 2002, and the insurance contract was a 'business agreement' because it was not for personal, family, or household purposes.
