ARTICLE
10 April 2026

Estates And Limitation Periods

CM
Casey & Moss LLP

Contributor

Casey & Moss LLP is a Toronto based law firm focused exclusively on estate, trust and capacity litigation, as well as estate administration. We assist our clients with the legal ramifications of incapacitating illnesses, death, and dying.
For Estates litigators, the date of the Deceased person's death is perhaps the key piece of information we need to get from a potential client. That date is relevant for many purposes...
Canada Family and Matrimonial
Casey & Moss LLP are most popular:
  • with Senior Company Executives, HR and Finance and Tax Executives
  • with readers working within the Accounting & Consultancy, Automotive and Law Firm industries

For Estates litigators, the date of the Deceased person's death is perhaps the key piece of information we need to get from a potential client. That date is relevant for many purposes, but the most significant is that it starts a limitation period running. Under section 38(3) of the Trustee Act, most potential claims against a Deceased person become statute barred – in other words, they expire – two years from the date of the death.1

Sections 38(2) and (3) reads as follows:

38(2) Except in cases of libel and slander, if a deceased person committed or is by law liable for a wrong to another in respect of his or her person or to another person's property, the person wronged may maintain an action against the executor or administrator of the person who committed or is by law liable for the wrong.

(3) An action under this section shall not be brought after the expiration of two years from the death of the deceased.

Unlike the standard limitation period in the Limitations Act, 2002, which covers the vast majority of claims, the limitation period set by s. 38(3) runs whether the potential claim is discovered (or even discoverable) or not. The time for bringing a claim can expire without a potential claimant even knowing it existed in the first place. This makes the Trustee Act's limitation period particularly strict in its operation, leading to a potentially harsh result for would-be claimants. Once two years from death has elapsed, there is rarely anything to be done for a potential claimant, no matter how strong their case might have been.

That said, there are a few important ways that the two-year limitation period can be "tolled," or suspended. Three of these are set out in the Limitations Act itself. Others exist at common law.

Provisions Under the Limitations Act that Toll the Limitation Period

Section 19(5) of the Limitations Act lists three specific sections of that Act that can delay the expiry of a limitation period, even limitation periods set in another act (such as the Trustee Act): Sections 6, 7 and 11.

Sections 6 and 7: Incapable Parties

Section 6 of the Limitations Act provides that a limitation period does not run against a minor during any time in which the minor does not have a litigation guardian. Section 7 provides the same for an incapable person during any time in which they are not represented by a litigation guardian. For both sections, the litigation guardian must be appointed "in relation to the claim", not at large or in some other proceeding. As a result, someone would need to seek the appointment of a litigation guardian to address the particular claim and thereby start the limitation period running. (See section 9, which allows a potential defendant to appoint a litigation guardian for the incapable person or minor with a potential claim.)

Section 11: Settlement Discussions

Section 11 tolls the limitation period in specific circumstances where the parties are attempting settlement:

11 (1) If a person with a claim and a person against whom the claim is made have agreed to have an independent third party resolve the claim or assist them in resolving it, the limitation periods established by sections 4 and 15 do not run from the date the agreement is made until,

(a) the date the claim is resolved;

(b) the date the attempted resolution process is terminated; or

(c) the date a party terminates or withdraws from the agreement.

As this section describes, not any settlement discussion will toll the limitation period. Settlement offers back and forth between parties is not enough. There must be agreement to involve a third party, though there need not necessarily be agreement on the identity of that third party, or on a date or particular process. And in the case of Tribury v. Sandra, the court held that it will otherwise give a generous interpretation to the application of section 11:

In circumstances where there is ambiguity in what the parties agreed to mediate or when one of the parties to the litigation does not immediately consent to participate in the mediation process, the limitation period should still be suspended. Otherwise, plaintiffs will be reluctant to engage in a mediation process for fear that they will be 'caught out' in the event they did not set out a comprehensive mediation agreement.2

In other words, if there is a broad agreement to mediate all issues involving an estate or arising from a death, one party cannot try to say that the limitation period on some specific issue expired during the time there was agreement to mediate.

Common-Law Doctrines that Toll the Limitation Period

Finally, the Court of Appeal has held that common law doctrines can also toll the limitation period under s. 38(3) of the Trustee Act. Moldaver J.A., speaking for the court in that case, held as follows:

In my view, s. 38(3) was exempted from the new Act so that its common law status would be preserved and it would remain immune from the discoverability rule. In other words, the legislature intended that s. 38(3) should continue to be governed by common law principles.3

Fraudulent Concealment

The doctrine of fraudulent concealment is one such principle. Where the existence of a claim has been fraudulently concealed from the potential claimant, the doctrine suspends the running of the limitation period until the potential claimant could reasonably discover the cause of action.4

Special Circumstances

Another common-law doctrine is the doctrine of special circumstances, which is available to permit a court to add parties to an existing action, provided the defendant knew of the claim and is not significantly prejudiced. The provision continues to apply to limitation periods that remain in effect outside the Limitations Act, despite the fact that the doctrine was abolished by s. 20 of that Act for cases governed by the limitation periods set out in that Act.5

Conclusion

All of these exceptions rely on the existence of specific facts, which won't apply to most potential claims. While they may be useful tools in your lawyer's tool belt, by far the easiest way to make sure you are able to advance your claim against an estate is to make sure you consult a lawyer as soon as possible.

Footnotes

1 Note that the Trustee Act does not apply to all claims you may want to bring against an estate, which may have either longer or significantly shorter limitation periods. For example, the limitation period for a dependant's support claim is 6 months from the date of probate. The best advice is always to consult a lawyer as soon as you think you may have a claim.

2 Tribury v. Sandro, 2013 ONSC 658 (CanLII), at para 69

3 Giroux Estate v. Trillium Health Centre (2005), 2005 CanLII 1488 (ON CA), 74 O.R. (3d) 341, [2005] O.J. No. 226 (C.A.), at para 33.

4 Ibid at para 34.

5 Bikur Cholim Jewish Volunteer Services v. Penna Estate, 2009 ONCA 196 (CanLII), at para 51.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

[View Source]

Mondaq uses cookies on this website. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies as set out in our Privacy Policy.

Learn More