Background:

• The plaintiff, 1375175 Ontario Inc. ("137"), owned a commercial building historically used for multiple tenants.
• In 2015, the Municipality of Chatham-Kent (CK) issued an Order to Comply (OTC) stating the building was only authorized for single-tenant use, requiring either a permit for multi-tenant use or reduction to single-tenant use.
• 137 evicted most tenants, claiming the cost of necessary renovations was prohibitive.
• 137 later alleged negligence by CK for improperly issuing the OTC and poor record-keeping.

Procedural History:

• Original negligence claims filed in 2016; amended claim introduced in 2022, asserting CK negligently issued the OTC.
• CK sought summary judgment, arguing the claim was statute-barred under Ontario's Limitations Act, which sets a two-year period from the claim's discovery.

Key Legal Issues:

1. Did 137 discover its claim within the limitation period?
2. Was there a genuine issue requiring trial regarding CK’s negligence?

Court’s Analysis and Decision:

• Discoverability: The court found 137 knew, or ought to have known, the material facts for the claim before May 2020. Evidence included documents from CK and conversations between counsel in 2018-2019 where the claim was discussed.
• No Genuine Issue: Even if CK issued the OTC negligently, 137 had no recoverable damages since:
  • If multi-tenant use was legal, compliance with the Building Code would still require costly upgrades, which 137 chose not to undertake.
  • If multi-tenant use was unauthorized, the OTC was correct.

Conclusion:

• Summary judgment granted in favor of CK; the claim dismissed as statute-barred and lacking merit.

Costs:

• Parties instructed to negotiate costs, with provisions for written submissions if unresolved.