Varying Statutory Time Limits in Ontario Personal Injury Law, Canada Reviews

See all posts by Diamond and Diamond Lawyers

For decades, the foundational advice provided to injured parties in Ontario was relatively straightforward: a lawsuit must be commenced within two years of the accident. This “basic limitation period” provided a standardized window for plaintiffs to stabilize medically, assess their damages, and retain counsel.

However, relying on that general two-year rule today can be a disastrous mistake. Underlying the general limitation period is a complex substructure of “notice periods”, strict statutory deadlines by which a potential plaintiff must alert a defendant of their intention to make a claim.

The distinction is profound. A limitation period generally bars the remedy; a notice period often bars the right of action itself. Failure to adhere to the latter can result in the dismissal of a meritorious claim before a Statement of Claim is even drafted. Depending on where an incident occurs, specifically involving snow and ice, your rights to compensation can effectively melt away in as little as 10 days.

This article provides an exhaustive analysis of the varying statutory time limits that define Ontario personal injury law, explaining why the landscape is so fragmented and how to navigate the “temporal minefield” of civil justice.

The Limitations Act, 2002

To understand the exceptions, one must first understand the rule. The Limitations Act, 2002 establishes the default framework for civil deadlines in Ontario.

Section 4 of the Act creates the “Basic Limitation Period.” It dictates that a proceeding shall not be commenced in respect of a claim after the second anniversary of the day on which the claim was discovered. This two-year rule is the “gold standard” for litigation planning. It applies to the vast majority of personal injury claims, including general negligence, medical malpractice, and occupiers’ liability claims that do not involve snow or ice.

The law recognizes that it would be unfair to start the clock before a victim realizes they have been injured. Therefore, the two-year clock typically starts not necessarily on the day of the accident, but on the day the claim is “discovered.” This includes knowing that an injury has occurred, that it was caused by someone else’s negligence, and that a lawsuit is an appropriate remedy.

However, while the two-year limit is the baseline, specific statutes governing municipalities, the province, and private snow removal contractors override this comfort zone with aggressive notice requirements.

The 10-Day Municipal Rule

The most draconian deadline in Ontario law involves accidents on municipal property. Under the Municipal Act, 2001, specifically Section 44(10), if you are injured due to a lack of repair on a municipal “highway”—which includes roads, bridges, and arguably most importantly for pedestrians, sidewalks—you must provide written notice to the City Clerk within 10 days.

If a plaintiff falls on a city sidewalk on January 1st and waits until January 12th to consult a lawyer, the 10-day window has already closed. The municipality can move to have the claim dismissed immediately.

Why 10 Days? The “Transient Evidence” Doctrine

Why does the law favor municipalities with such a short deadline compared to private defendants? The courts accept the “transient evidence” justification. Municipalities manage thousands of kilometers of infrastructure. Conditions are highly changeable. Snow melts, ice shifts, and potholes are filled.

Without immediate notice, the municipality is prejudiced because it cannot inspect the exact conditions alleged to have caused the injury. A delay of even a few weeks could mean the difference between a forensic analysis of an ice patch and a guess based on general weather records. Furthermore, immediate notice allows the City to rectify the hazard to protect the public purse from further claims.

The “Reasonable Excuse” Safety Valve

The legislature recognized that a strict 10-day bar could be harsh. Section 44(12) provides that the failure to give notice is not a bar to the action if two conditions are met:

1. Reasonable Excuse: The plaintiff has a valid reason for the delay.
2. No Prejudice: The municipality is not prejudiced in its defense.

These criteria are conjunctive, you must prove both.

The definition of “reasonable excuse” is intensely fact-specific. In the case of Crinson v. Toronto (City), the plaintiff suffered a severe fracture requiring surgery and did not provide notice for several months. The Court of Appeal found he had a reasonable excuse because his primary focus was on his medical recovery.

However, legal trends are shifting. In the recent 2024 decision Marderosian v. City of Niagara Falls, the court signaled a tightening of this rule. The plaintiff provided notice 70 days after slipping on a tree root. She argued her delay was due to focusing on recovery. The court rejected this, noting she was able to attend medical appointments and was not so incapacitated that she couldn’t make a phone call or send a letter. The claim was dismissed.

This underscores a critical reality: “Focusing on recovery” is not a magic phrase. Unless you are physically or mentally incapacitated, the 10-day clock is ticking.

The Private Property Shift: The New 60-Day Rule (Bill 118)

For decades, the distinction between public and private liability was stark: 10 days for the government, 2 years for private owners. This changed on January 29, 2021, with the enactment of Bill 118, causing a paradigm shift in how private property slips and falls are handled.

The Insurance Crisis and Legislative Intent

The genesis of this change was economic. Snow removal contractors and property management companies were facing skyrocketing insurance premiums. Insurers argued that “long-tail” liability—where a lawsuit is filed 23 months after an accident—made it impossible to defend claims. By that time, daily plow logs were destroyed, CCTV footage was overwritten, and witnesses had moved on.

Section 6.1: Strict Notice

Bill 118 amended the Occupiers’ Liability Act to include Section 6.1. Now, no action shall be brought for the recovery of damages for personal injury caused by snow or ice against an occupier or an independent contractor unless, within 60 days after the occurrence, written notice of the claim has been served.

Key distinctions of the 60-day rule:

• Scope: It applies only to snow and ice. If you trip on a pothole or uneven pavement in a private plaza (with no ice involved), the 2-year limitation likely still applies.
• Service: The notice must be served personally or by registered mail. Regular email or a phone call may be insufficient.
• The Flow-Down: If a landlord receives notice, they must forward it to their snow removal contractor.

Like the municipal regime, there are exceptions for reasonable excuse and lack of prejudice. However, because this legislation is new, the case law is still developing. Plaintiffs should not test the waters; if snow or ice is involved, assume the 60-day deadline is absolute.

The Provincial Labyrinth: Highways vs. Buildings

Claims against the Province of Ontario (the Crown) introduce further complexity. The rules change depending on whether the injury happened on a highway or in a government building.

1. The King’s Highway (401, QEW, 400-Series)

Under the Public Transportation and Highway Improvement Act, claims involving provincial highways mimic the municipal rule. You must serve notice to the Minister of Transportation within 10 days. Note the recipient: serving the “Crown” generally or the wrong ministry can be fatal to the claim.

2. Crown Liability (Government Buildings)

If you slip and fall inside a ServiceOntario office or on other Crown land (not a highway), the Crown Liability and Proceedings Act, 2019 applies.

• General Rule: For most torts (like negligence), you must give 60 days’ notice before you are allowed to sue. This is a “wait period.”
• The Exception: For “breach of duty attaching to the ownership… of property” (i.e., a slip and fall), the 10-day notice requirement often remains in effect.

This creates a dual regime where confusion is common. The safest route for any injury on government property is to serve notice within 10 days.

Motor Vehicle Accidents: A Hybrid Timeline

If you are involved in a car accident in Toronto, you are simultaneously triggering two different legal processes, each with its own clock.

1. Statutory Accident Benefits (SABS)

Regardless of who was at fault, you are entitled to benefits (medical rehab, income replacement) from your own insurer.

• 7 Days: You must notify your insurer of the intention to apply for benefits within 7 days of the accident.
• 30 Days: Once you receive the application package (OCF-1), you must file it within 30 days.
• Consequence: Missing these deadlines usually results in a delay of benefits rather than a total bar, provided you have a “reasonable explanation.”

2. The Tort Claim (Suing the At-Fault Driver)

To sue the other driver for pain and suffering:

• 120 Days: Section 258.3 of the Insurance Act requires you to give written notice of your intention to sue within 120 days.
• Consequence: Unlike the 10-day municipal rule, missing the 120-day notice is not fatal. You can still sue. However, you face cost penalties (e.g., denial of pre-judgment interest).

Summary of Time Limits

To help visualize the complexity of the Ontario framework, we have compiled the varying deadlines below.

Strategic Practice: The “Shotgun Approach”

Given the complexity of jurisdiction, the boundaries between properties are not always clear. A patch of ice might sit on the borderline between a municipal sidewalk and a private commercial driveway.

In these scenarios, experienced personal injury counsel utilizes a “shotgun approach.” This involves:

• Immediate Investigation: Identifying all potential owners (City, Province, Private Landlord, Commercial Tenant).
• Protective Notice: Serving a generic notice of claim to all potential parties within the shortest applicable timeline (10 days). It is far safer to withdraw a notice later than to try and argue “reasonable excuse” for a missed deadline.
• Preservation Letters: Immediately demanding that private owners and municipalities preserve CCTV footage and maintenance logs. If a defendant destroys evidence after receiving notice, the court may draw an adverse inference against them.

Know Your Rights

The landscape of personal injury limitations in Ontario is a testament to the legislature’s balancing act between protecting the rights of the injured and ensuring the operational stability of public and private defendants.

For municipalities and the Crown, the 10-day notice is a formidable shield. For private snow removal contractors, the 60-day notice is a new layer of protection designed to stabilize the insurance market. For the injured plaintiff, however, these timelines represent a series of trapdoors.

The takeaway for Torontonians is clear: do not wait. The old adage of “sleeping on your rights” no longer applies solely to years-long delays. In the context of an Ontario winter, your rights can expire before the snow even melts.

“Most people think they have two years to decide what to do after an accident, but that assumption is dangerous. In the current landscape, your rights can effectively expire in a week and a half. My advice is simple: don’t wait for the dust to settle. Call a lawyer immediately to send protective notice—let us worry about the deadlines so you can worry about your recovery,” says Jeremy Diamond, Senior Partner at Diamond & Diamond Lawyers.

In an Accident?

The personal injury lawyers at Diamond & Diamond provide a clear, actionable guide for anyone involved in car accidents or motorcycle accidents. The confusion following an accident can lead to unintentional but costly mistakes. Having a trusted resource can provide the clarity and peace of mind you need.

About Jeremy Diamond

Jeremy Diamond is a lawyer and member of both Ontario and Florida Bars. Jeremy practices in the area of Plaintiff personal injury litigation. Click here to learn more about Jeremy Diamond.