The Court of Appeal recently revisited its 1993 decision in Prete v. Ontario (1993), 110 D.L.R. (4^th) 94, which had suggested that claims for damages under s. 24(1) of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms should not be subject to any statutory limitation period.

A plaintiff can construct his case however he wishes. There a very few limits placed on the type of experts that plaintiffs can retain and the types of assessments to which the plaintiff can be subjected.

Factual assumptions cannot form the basis of commonality to support an action being certified as a class proceeding.  This was the theme of the recent Ontario Superior Court decision of Justice Michael Quigley dismissing the plaintiff’s motion for certification in the case of Nadolny v. Peel (Region), [2009] O.J. No. 4006, involving a claim for health insurance benefit premiums. 

Insurers should take note that the Court of Appeal has provided some direction on the statutory definition of catastrophic impairment by way of the Glasgow Coma Scale.