The Ontario Court of Appeal’s decision in Brady v. Waypoint Centre for Mental Health Care, 2025 ONCA 722 provides guidance on how limitation periods should be calculated when a claim was discoverable during the COVID-19 suspension of limitation periods. The court clarified the distinction between claims that were already running when the suspension commenced and those that became discoverable during the suspension period.
Background
The appellant, a social worker at Waypoint Centre, was employed in a bargaining unit position. In October 2018, she accepted a temporary acting manager assignment. In April 2020, she was advised that her temporary appointment would end and she would return to her bargaining unit. She learned that her original position was unavailable and she would be reassigned to a frontline clinical position. The appellant went on medical leave on May 14, 2020, and commenced a wrongful dismissal action on October 27, 2022.
The motion judge dismissed the claim on two grounds: (1) lack of jurisdiction over a matter arising from the collective agreement, and (2) the claim was statute-barred under the Limitations Act, 2002. The Court of Appeal addressed only the limitation period issue.
When was the COVID-19 Suspension of Limitation Periods?
Ontario Regulation 73/20 suspended all statutory limitation periods, retroactively to March 16, 2020. The suspension ended on September 14, 2020, following O. Reg. 457/20, for a total of 183 days.
The Court’s Analysis
The Court of Appeal identified a critical distinction between two scenarios:
Scenario 1: Claim discoverable before suspension commenced (prior to March 16, 2020)
In cases where the limitation clock was already running when the suspension began, the clock was paused for 183 days. Upon resumption on September 14, 2020, the clock restarted. The practical effect is that the deadline is extended by 183 days. This was the situation analyzed in McAuley v. Canada Post Corporation, 2021 ONSC 4528, where the court noted the suspension “extended any running limitation period by 183 days.”
Scenario 2: Claim discoverable during suspension (March 16 to September 14, 2020)
Where a claim becomes discoverable during the suspension period, the limitation clock does not commence until the suspension ends. There is no “running” period to pause; the period simply begins later.
Application to Brady
The appellant’s claim was discoverable in late April or mid-May 2020 during the suspension period. Under Scenario 2, her two-year limitation period began running on September 14, 2020, the date the suspension ended. Accordingly, her deadline was September 14, 2022. Her action, filed October 27, 2022, was commenced 43 days after the deadline and was statute-barred.
The appellant’s argument that the suspension should be “added” to her two-year period (resulting in a deadline of October 30, 2022) was rejected as misapplying McAuley, which addressed a different factual situation.
The appellant argued that the respondent was not prejudiced and that the delay was minimal. The court noted that the Limitations Act, 2002 provides a mandatory two-year limitation period with no judicial discretion to extend it absent specific statutory exceptions (such as s. 6, 7, or 20). None of those exceptions applied.
Implications for Practice
This decision clarifies an important technical point for claims that became discoverable during the COVID-19 suspension and provides useful guidance for practitioners advising clients on the interaction between the COVID-19 suspension and limitation period calculations.
Thanks for reading,