Tag: limitation periods

  • Important Limitation Dates in Estate Litigation

    Important Limitation Dates in Estate Litigation

    Various different legal remedies ensure that estates distribute as the testator intended and prevent invalid disinheritance. However, claimants must adhere to certain deadlines to initiate an estate litigation case. Typically, estate litigation cases have a limitation period of either two years or six months. The specific time restrictions, however, vary between cases based on their individual circumstances and the type of claim made.

    The Limitation Act

    While courts typically adhere closely to limitation periods, they occasionally extend these periods in certain cases.

    According to the Limitation Act, “a court proceeding in respect of a claim must not be commenced more than two years after the day on which the claim is discovered.” That is the day when the claimant became aware of the event that gives rise to the claim. It can also mean the day the claimant should have reasonably been aware. In estate litigation cases, the claim is usually discovered on or near the day that the testator passed away. In most estate litigation cases, a claimant has two years from the day of the testator’s death to take action. Exceptions exist to the standard two-year limitation period. The most common exception is for will variation claims, which have a limitation period of six months.

    Limitation periods are meant to encourage people to begin their claims in a timely manner. Beyond the typical two year window, it becomes increasingly difficult to bring forth strong evidence for the court. Limitation periods incentivize people to bring their claims before the courts as soon as possible. They can also restrict people from making absurd claims many years after the passing of a testator.

    180 Day (6 Month) Limitation Period

    Under the Wills, Estates and Succession Act, will variation claims have a 180 day limitation period from the date probate was granted. This can include will challenges, rectification claims, and unfair disinheritance cases. The limitation period for these claims starts from the date probate is granted, not the date of the testator’s death.

    Potential Exceptions to a Limitation Period

    While limitation periods are strictly adhered to by the courts, there can be exceptions made in special circumstances. The case of Chan v. Lee (Estate) (2004) is an example of when the courts extended the limitation period well beyond the conventional 180 days. The daughters in this case did not raise their claim until more than a year after probate was granted. They claimed their brothers promised to remedy the situation and fairly distribute the estate between them. The sons did not notify them of the will being granted probate with the intention of abusing the limitation period.

    Ultimately, the judge dismissed the sons’ cross-claim that the limitation date had passed and heard the daughters’ claim. The sisters could not have reasonably known how to act in their best interests while being mislead. Hence, the limitation period on their claim did not begin until the day the sisters discovered they had been lied to regarding the administration of the estate.

    Two Year Limitation Period

    Estate litigation cases typically have a limitation period of two years from the date of the testator’s death, with the exception of will variation claims.  Sometimes, the courts find it reasonable for someone to have not been aware of the death of the testator until sometime thereafter. For example, if they live outside of the country or did not keep in close contact with the testator. In such circumstances, the court can extend the limitation period for claims made by that person to two years from the date they learned of the testator’s death, if the claimant can provide reasonable evidence of their lack of knowledge at the time of death.

    An example of a case with a two year limitation period could be a fraud claim against a will’s executor. A beneficiary or other interested party would have two years from when they become aware, or ought to have been aware, that the executor has committed fraud. In some cases, the discovery is not until many years after the fact, with the 2 year clock beginning to run on the date that the claimant became aware or ought to have become aware of the fraud.

    If you think you have an estate litigation case that should be heard before the courts, contact an experienced estate lawyer today. The earlier the process begins, the more likely you are to be successful, and you will avoid any limitation periods restricting your access to legal remedy.

    Have a question about this topic or a different legal topic? Contact us for a free consultation. Reach us via phone at 250-888-0002, or via email at info@leaguelaw.com.

  • Children’s ICBC Claims: The Clock is Ticking

    Children’s ICBC Claims: The Clock is Ticking

    ICBC Claims Involving Children  

    What happens when a child is harmed in a car accident? Minors (those under 19 years of age) who have been harmed in car accidents have a right to make an injury claim through ICBC.  Like adults, they are entitled to no-fault benefits and may also be entitled to additional compensation through a tort claim.  However, the time limits (limitation periods) that apply to the injury claims of children are different from those that apply to the injury claims of adults. 

    What are No-fault Claims (Part 7 benefits) and Tort Claims?

    Compensation from ICBC for being injured in a car accident comes from either no-fault (or Part 7) claims and/or from tort claims.

    People are entitled to no-fault benefits regardless of their fault or responsibility for the accident. ICBC no-fault benefits include some payment for rehabilitation costs for medical and physiotherapy treatments and partial wage loss replacement.  It is important to note that the amounts paid by ICBC for no-fault benefits often do not cover the full cost of medical and physiotherapy treatments. 

    Additional compensation, for people who are at least partially not at fault for the accident, happens through a tort claim.   A tort claim is intended to “make whole” a victim of an accident. Tort claim compensation includes payment for pain and suffering, and an award for wage loss and treatment costs over and above what was covered through ICBC’s no-fault benefits. 

    What limitation periods apply to a child’s ICBC claims?

    People under the age of majority in BC (under 19 years of age) are under what is called a “legal disability”.  The “legal disability” is that they are unable to sue on their own behalf and must rely on a parent or guardian to do so on their behalf.  Recognizing this “legal disability”, the Limitation Act provides that for a minor, their limitation period of two years usually does not begin to run until their 19th birthday, however, there are some important exceptions to this rule.  While the limitation period is suspended for the tort portion of a child’s ICBC claims, the limitation period for a child’s Part 7 or no-fault benefits portion of their ICBC claim is an exception to the rule.  

    The clock is not stopped until the claimant’s 19th birthday, with respect to Part 7 or no-fault benefits.  A minor, even someone who is 10 years old for example, must sue ICBC within two years of the accident date or the last day they received no-fault benefits, or their right to no-fault or Part 7 benefits will be forever lost.   That is, if ICBC refuses to pay for no-fault benefits, perhaps because they believed the injuries were caused by some event other than the car accident, then a person, regardless of age, has only two years from the date of the accident or the last day ICBC paid no-fault benefits, to preserve their limitation period for the no-fault benefits portion of the claim by filing court documents.  

    What should parents of children injured in a motor vehicle incident do?

    Parents of children injured in a motor vehicle accident should seek legal advice about their child’s legal claims from the accident and should bear in mind the limitation periods that apply to their child’s claim (both the tort and no-fault portions of their claim).  Parents are responsible for protecting the legal rights of their children and should make a timely ICBC claim on their behalf if they are involved in a motor vehicle collision.  If you, or your child has been involved in a motor vehicle collision, it is important to get sound legal advice.  Our injury lawyers offer free consultations, can help pay for treatment when ICBC will not, do not get paid until your case is resolved and are experts in ICBC injury claims. Contact us at 250-888-0002 or via email at info@leaguelaw.com.

  • Don’t be Sorry for Saying Sorry – the BC Apology Act

    Don’t be Sorry for Saying Sorry – the BC Apology Act

    What is an Apology and What is the Apology Act?

    Many people know that a simple, sincere apology, can avoid a lot of legal trouble.  Whether you might have caused a car accident, said something defamatory, broken a contract, or perhaps even committed a minor criminal offence, an expression of remorse can go a long way in avoiding a dispute and solving problems.  That is why the law in BC encourages people to apologize by ensuring that if they do apologize, it cannot be used against them as proof they did something wrong.  This BC law is called the Apology Act, and is a very short piece of legislation that very few British Columbians know about.

    The Apology Act defines an apology as:

    …an expression of sympathy or regret, a statement that one is sorry or any other words or actions indicating contrition or commiseration, whether or not the words or actions admit or imply an admission of fault in connection with the matter to which the words or actions relate.

    Legal Consequences of Making an Apology are Limited

    The Apology Act states that an apology made by, or on behalf of a person, does not constitute an express or implied admission of fault or liability by that person.  Importantly, the law provides an apology cannot be taken into account by any court in determining whether a person is at fault for an event.  An apology cannot be used as evidence in court.  For example, if you are in a car accident, and you apologize to the other driver, the other driver cannot raise this apology in court as proof you think you might be at fault for the accident.

    Some people believe that apologizing for an accident can void their insurance coverage.  Generally speaking, insurance policies require people not to prejudice the insurer’s ability to defend them, and if they do, the insurer can avoid providing coverage to that person.  The Apology Act however, provides that an apology cannot void insurance coverage.

    Many people know that if you are in an accident, you only have two years to file a claim in court to preserve your right to compensation.  This is called a limitation period.  In some circumstances, that we discuss in previous blogs, the limitation period can be extended beyond two years.  However, the Apology Act is clear that an apology does not serve to confirm the basis for bringing a claim, or postpone the running of the two-year limitation period.  This means that if someone denies they caused you harm, and then later apologizes for it, your two year limitation period runs from the time they caused you harm, not when they later apologize.

    I hope you have learned something from this blog.  Please feel free to like us on Facebook, follow us on Twitter and subscribe to our YouTube channel to receive notice of our future weekly video blogs on the law.  If you have a personal injury, estate dispute or marine law issue – contact us for a free consultation at 250-888-0002 or email us at info@leaguelaw.com.