Court Puts Case On Hold Until Plaintiff Turns 19

In Gill v. Morin, the infant was struck by a vehicle while riding an all terrain vehicle. The infant’s mother was the litigation guardian. The Defendant denied fault, and alleged that the mother was to blame for not properly supervising the infant. This created a conflict of interest with respect to the mother continuing to act in her capacity as litigation guardian, so she applied to have the Public Guardian and Trustee take over the lawsuit. They refused, unless they were protected by any potential costs consequences. The Court eventually ruled that the lawsuit should be put on hold until the infant’s 19th birthday, at which time the infant could decide whether or not to carry on with the case.


[32] It is indeed regrettable that this defendant, who may eventually be found to be blameless with respect to this accident, may be obliged to wait several more years for the issues of liability and perhaps quantum to be resolved, but in the absence of any specific evidence, I am not prepared to find that the defendant is prejudiced by a stay of this action until the plaintiff obtains the age of majority. The limitation for this cause of action will not begin to run against the infant plaintiff until he reaches the age of majority on February 2, 2012 and it seems to be the defendant is no more prejudiced by a stay of proceedings then he would be had the plaintiff waited until then to commence this action.


[33] In the result then, Piar will be removed as litigation guardian forthwith. The third party’s application to appoint the PGT as litigation guardian is dismissed. The action will be stayed until the infant plaintiff reaches the age of majority.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *