LAASCH v TURENNE, 2012 ABCA 32
SLATTER, BIELBY JJA AND READ J (Ad Hoc)
3.2: How to start an action
In 2006, Default Judgment was awarded in favour of the Appellant Plaintiffs against the Respondent Physician in a medical malpractice Action in Montana. In 2008, the Appellants filed an Originating Notice to have the Montana Judgment registered in Alberta. That Action was dismissed in 2009. In 2008, before the registration Application was heard, but more than two years after the date of the Montana Judgment, the Appellants commenced a debt Action to enforce the Montana Judgment. In 2010, a Master of the Court of Queen’s Bench of Alberta granted Summary Judgment in favour of the Appellants, concluding that the two year limitation period did not begin to run until the date the registration Application was dismissed. On Appeal, the Chambers Judge concluded that the Action was barred by the Limitations Act.
The Court of Appeal held that the Chambers Judge made no error of law and dismissed the Appeal. The Respondent was immune from liability with respect to the debt Action because it was commenced more than two years after the limitation period began to run. However, the Court further held that its Decision did not preclude an Application by the Appellants under Rule 3.2(6) to add the debt Action to the Originating Notice by which the Appellants unsuccessfully sought registration of the Montana Judgment.View CanLII Details