Limitations (Employment)

Sosnowski v. MacEwen Petroleum Inc., 2019 ONSC 1860 (CanLII)

[5] The issue is whether or not there is a genuine issue for trial with respect to the plaintiffs’ claim as a result of the Limitations Act, 2002, and whether the action by the plaintiffs against MacEwen is statute-barred. In particular, the parties disagree on the application of section 5 (1) (iv) of the Limitations Act, 2002 and whether or not the claim is considered “discovered” on the earlier of, the day on which the person first knew, that, having regard to the nature of the injury, loss or damage, a proceeding would be an appropriate means to seek to remedy it. (Emphasis added)

[6] Is the plaintiffs’ action statute-barred having been commenced on July 24, 2015, more than two years after Mr. Sosnowski’s termination from his employment by MacEwen on November 9, 2009? Alternatively, is the plaintiffs’ action not statute-barred having been commenced on July 24, 2015, within two years of his criminal matters concluding in the Court of Appeal with his verdicts of acquittal on November 26, 2014?

[7] Simply put, when does the limitation time period start to run?

Result:

[8] The defendant MacEwen’s motion for summary judgment is granted. There is no genuine issue for trial. A judgment shall issue that the plaintiffs’ claims as against the defendant MacEwen are dismissed as being statute-barred by the Limitations Act, 2002. The triggering event for the commencement of the limitation period is the date upon which it would have been legally appropriate for the plaintiffs to commence legal proceedings to seek damages for Mr. Sosnowski’s termination of employment, which in this case was November 9, 2009, being the date of his termination by MacEwen. Costs are reserved.