Is there an action for the infant Nadine out of time?

Alberta, Canada


The following excerpt is from Brown v. University of Alberta Hospital, 1997 CanLII 14750 (AB QB):

The plaintiff argues that the action for the infant, Nadine, is not out of time by virtue of: i) the decision in Campbell v. Fang; ii) section 59 of the Limitation of Actions Act; iii) a discoverability requirement in section 59 of the Limitation of Action Act; and/or iv) a discoverability requirement in section 55 of the Limitation of Action Act. I will now deal with each of these arguments in turn. i) Campbell v. Fang:

Other Questions


Can a party to an action extend the action by unilateral action, when nothing has been done to materially advance the action for five years or more? (Alberta, Canada)
Is there any case law in favour of combining derivative action with personal action? (Alberta, Canada)
Can events arising from a prior action be the foundation for a new action? (Alberta, Canada)
Can a learned trial judge order that a constructive trust action be used in a divorce action? (Alberta, Canada)
What is the test for an action under which an action cannot succeed? (Alberta, Canada)
What is the test for determining an amount received by reason of action against an employer as a result of action taken against it? (Alberta, Canada)
When a testator begins a matrimonial property action against his ex-wife for his undivided interest in their jointly owned duplex home, does the testator have a right to dispose of the property at the time he wrote the will? (Alberta, Canada)
What is the meaning of intent without corresponding action in a divorce action? (Alberta, Canada)
Is there a cause of action for damages arising from the date of time running out? (Alberta, Canada)
Does the mandatory term “shall” apply to corollary relief actions in divorce actions? (Alberta, Canada)
X



Alexi white


"The most advanced legal research software ever built."

Trusted by top litigators from across North America.