Skip to content

New Brunswick government suspends limitation periods and time limits applicable to ongoing proceedings

Catherine Lahey, QC, Iain Sinclair and Robert Bradley

The Province of New Brunswick declared a State of Emergency on March 19, 2020 related to the COVID-19 pandemic and issued a Mandatory Order stipulating restrictions on numerous activities aimed at slowing the spread of the virus. On April 24, 2020, the Minister of Public Safety issued a renewed and revised Mandatory Order (the “Order”) which relaxed restrictions pertaining to various activities and included a provision which significantly impacts the conduct of litigation in our Province.

Specifically, paragraphs 27(a) and (b) of the Order suspend limitation periods related to the commencement of proceedings as well as time limits relating to the conduct of ongoing proceedings throughout the term of the Order and for up to 90 days following the expiration of the State of Emergency. The suspension is retroactive to March 19, 2020.

The relevant provisions of the Order provide:

27 …

(a)        In accordance with the authority granted me under s.12.1 of the Emergency Measures Act and on the recommendation of the Attorney General, I hereby, retroactive to March 19, 2020:

    • (i) suspend the operation of any act, regulation, rule, municipal by-law or ministerial order that establishes limitation periods for commencing any proceeding before a court, administrative tribunal or other decision-maker; and
    • (ii) suspend the operation of any act, regulation, rule, municipal by-law or ministerial order that establishes limitation periods for taking steps in any proceeding before a court, administrative tribunal or other decision-maker.

(b)         In accordance with paragraph 12.1(c) of the Emergency Measures Act, this paragraph will cease to have effect no later than 90 days [sic] the state of emergency ends.

As noted, these provisions create significant implications both for the commencement of new proceedings and the conduct of ongoing proceedings in New Brunswick.

Commencement of proceedings

Section 27(a)(i) of the Order suspends limitation periods which were due to expire on or after March 19, 2020 until the expiration of the State of Emergency and up to 90 days thereafter. The Order relieves parties intending to initiate claims from the obligation to commence proceedings within the time limit prescribed by any applicable statute or other enactment described in the Order.

For example, if the limitation period applicable to a claim expired on March 20, 2020, the claim is not time barred if the plaintiff/applicant failed to commence the proceeding by that date. Now, in accordance with section 27(a)(i) of the Order, that limitation period is temporarily suspended until the expiration of the State of Emergency and up to 90 days thereafter.  With no expiration date for the State of Emergency in sight, this provision will have a substantial impact upon the course of litigation in our Province.

Conduct of ongoing proceedings

In accordance with section 27(a)(ii) of the Order, all time limits stipulated by any act, regulation, rule, municipal by-law or ministerial order applicable to any steps in a proceeding before a court, administrative tribunal or decision-maker are also temporarily suspended. Consequently, the requirement to take any steps in a proceeding as stipulated by any act, regulation, rule, municipal by-law or ministerial order, including obligations imposed by our Rules of Court pertaining to ongoing actions governed by New Brunswick courts, is temporarily suspended.

For example, if a party was required to file a Statement of Defence on April 20, 2020, that requirement is now temporarily suspended until the expiration of the State of Emergency and up to 90 days thereafter. Accordingly, the ability to enforce prescribed time limits and compel a party to take steps to advance a proceeding is now temporarily suspended as mandated by the Order.

Impact of the suspension prescribed by the order

The full scope of the impact of the suspension prescribed by the Order will not be known for some time. However, in the short term, the provision of the Order suspending limitation periods will have a significant impact on claims management and the assessment of exposure to anticipated litigation as well as the setting of associated reserves. Moreover, the suspension of time limits in ongoing proceedings is expected to delay the progress of litigation beyond the impact already experienced as a result of the partial suspension of court operations.

Close monitoring of the Order for amendments is recommended in order to identify any updates which could impact the period of suspension and the potential scope of this government initiative.


This update is intended for general information only. If you have questions about the above, please contact a member of our Litigation & Alternative Dispute Resolution Group.

Click here to subscribe to Stewart McKelvey Thought Leadership articles and updates.

SHARE

Archive

Search Archive


 
 

Prince Edward Island adopts new Municipal Government Act

December 22, 2016

Perlene Morrison Prince Edward Island’s municipal legislation is being modernized with the implementation of the Municipal Government Act (the “MGA”). The legislation has now received royal assent and will be proclaimed in force at a future date.…

Read More

Land Use Planning in Prince Edward Island: The Year in Review

December 20, 2016

Jonathan Coady and Chera-Lee Gomez It’s that time of year – the moment when we look back at the year that was and chart our course for the year ahead. For many councillors, administrators and planning professionals…

Read More

The Latest in Labour Law: A Stewart McKelvey Newsletter – Onsite OHS liability: Who is (and who is not) the true constructor?

December 15, 2016

Peter McLellan, QC and Michelle Black In a recent decision, R v McCarthy’s Roofing Limited, Judge Anne Derrick provided some much-needed clarity around what it means to be a “constructor” on a job site. This is critical as…

Read More

Federal Government’s Cannabis Report: What does it mean for employers?

December 15, 2016

Rick Dunlop On December 13, 2016, the Government of Canada released A Framework for the Legalization and Regulation of Cannabis in Canada: The Final Report of the Task Force on Cannabis Legalization and Regulation (“Report”). The Report’s…

Read More

Canadian employers facing marijuana challenges in the workplace

November 25, 2016

Brian Johnston, QC Canadian employers are already coping with approximately 75,000 Canadians authorized to use medical marijuana. Health Canada expects that this number will increase to about 450,000 by 2024. Employers know that medical marijuana…

Read More

You’ve got mail – Ontario Court of Appeal sends a constitutional message to municipalities about community mailboxes

October 28, 2016

Jonathan Coady With its decision in Canada Post Corporation v. City of Hamilton,1 the Ontario Court of Appeal has confirmed that the placement of community mailboxes by Canada Post is a matter beyond the reach of municipalities…

Read More

A window on interpreting insurance contracts: Top 10 points from Ledcor Construction

September 23, 2016

Jennifer Taylor Introduction Thanks to some dirty windows, insurance lawyers have a new go-to Supreme Court case on issues of policy interpretation: Ledcor Construction Ltd v Northbridge Indemnity Insurance Co, 2016 SCC 37. The insurers in Ledcor Construction had…

Read More

Charter-ing a Different Course? Two decisions on TWU’s proposed law school

August 11, 2016

Jennifer Taylor Introduction Appeal courts in Ontario1 and Nova Scotia2 have now issued decisions about Trinity Western University’s proposed law school (“TWU”) in British Columbia, and at first glance they couldn’t be more different. The Court of Appeal for…

Read More

Restart the Clock!: Confirmation and resetting limitation periods in Tuck v. Supreme Holdings, 2016 NLCA 40

August 11, 2016

Joe Thorne1 and Giles Ayers2 Limitation periods serve a critical function in the civil justice system. They promote the timely resolution of litigation on the basis of reliable evidence, and permit litigants to assess their legal exposure…

Read More

Client Update: SCC issues major decision affecting federal employers: Wilson v. Atomic Energy of Canada Limited

July 15, 2016

On July 14, 2016 the Supreme Court of Canada issued a significant decision affecting federally regulated employers across Canada. In Wilson v. Atomic Energy of Canada Limited the Court held that the purpose of the unjust dismissal…

Read More

Search Archive


Scroll To Top