Legal Blog

Wilful Concealment

Paterson v. Royal Bank of Canada, 2026 ONCA 480

On summary judgment, the motion judge struck the plaintiff’s statement of claim, which alleged that the defendants conducted a decades-long campaign to injure and defame him. The Court of Appeal determined that the 15-year ultimate limitation period barred the action because the plaintiff knew the core facts of his claim by 2004 at the latest. The doctrine of wilful concealment could not toll the limitation period because the requisite causative element (i.e., ignorance of the cause of action caused by misconduct), was absent given the plaintiff’s own prior knowledge.

Written by Jonathan Speigel, the founding partner of Speigel Nichols Fox LLP, leads the litigation and construction practices.