Zeppa v Woodbridge Heating & Air-Conditioning Ltd was yet another decision on discoverability. Justice Feldman dissented. The case reviews the discoverability analysis under section 5 of the Limitations Act, 2002 in detail, including the “appropriate means” test, as well as discussing the interplay between the discoverability analysis and fraudulent concealment.
In Welsh v. Ontario, the Court of Appeal held that although it was within Justice Perrell’s discretion to express concerns about the amount of class counsel’s fees, he was not permitted to modify the terms of a negotiated settlement unilaterally, without the consent of the parties and without seeking submissions from the parties on the issue. The motion judge’s decision to require more than a third of class counsel’s fees to be donated to charity was set aside, and the matter was remitted to another judge of the Superior Court.
Other topics covered this week included commercial tenancies, residential tenancies, oppression in the condo law context, the expiry of a tolling agreement, restarting the limitation period clock, municipal law (authority to pass bylaws) and health law (OHIP).
Please log in to read the full article.