What is the test for “ought to have known” that an action should have been started?
Alberta, Canada
The following excerpt is from Amack v Wishewan, 2014 ABQB 613 (CanLII):
The test for determining when a claimant “ought to have known” that an action should have been started is set out in paragraph 20 of Gayton v. Lacasse, supra: “in light of his or her own circumstances and interests, at what point could the plaintiff reasonably have brought an action?”(Emphasis added).
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.
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 where the limitation period to start a new action has run out? (Alberta, Canada)
What is the meaning of intent without corresponding action in a divorce action? (Alberta, Canada)
Is an expert opinion required to start the limitations period running in a medical negligence action? (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)
What is the test for an action under which an action cannot succeed? (Alberta, Canada)
Can events arising from a prior action be the foundation for a new action? (Alberta, Canada)
What is the discoverability of the circumstances in which the claimant ought to have known? (Alberta, Canada)
Is some damage sufficient for a cause of action to arise and a limitation period to start run? (Alberta, Canada)
Can a learned trial judge order that a constructive trust action be used in a divorce action? (Alberta, Canada)
