Limitation Period Cheat Sheet

August 5, 2013
Charles Wagner and Brendan Donovan

Please note this post was updated on March 29, 2018, after a Court of Appeal decision.

This cheat sheet is intended as a quick reference guide for estate litigators dealing with limitation periods. For a comprehensive review of this topic I refer the reader to articles written by senior members of the bar¹ listed in the end notes.

Generally², a limitation period sets a red line which a claimant can no longer advance a claim. One reason limitation periods are considered desirable is that bringing disputes to trial sooner enables the parties to present the best evidence. Delays in adjudication may be difficult as memories fades, witnesses die and evidence is lost. Moreover, finality of outstanding issues brings certainty which is desirable both for business and those people collaterally involved with any dispute.

These are the key statues dealing with limitation periods in the context of estate litigation. For ease of reference I have listed them here with hyper link access to them on line.

Limitations Act, 2002, S.O. 2002, c. 24, Sched. B (the “Act”);
Succession Law Reform Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. S.26 (the “SLRA”);
Family Law Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. F.3 (“FLA”);
Real Property Limitations Act, RSO 1990, c. L.15 (“RPLA”);
Estates Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. E.21;
Estates Administration Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. E.22; and
Trustee Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. T.23

A key date to keep in mind is January 1, 2004. This is the date the Limitations Act 2002 came into force and a dividing line that determines which limitation period if any applies. If discovery of the cause of action took place prior January 1, 2004 the old applicable limitation period applies or there may be no limitation period at all.³ If the cause of action was discovered after December 31, 2003 then the limitation period set out in the Limitations Act 2002 and applicable legislation applies⁴.
Under the Limitations Act, 2002 there is a two year limitation period from discovery of the cause of action and an ultimate limitation period of 15 years from the date the cause of action arose even if the cause of action was not discovered⁵. Discoverability is a key issue in the context of a discussion of limitation periods, but is beyond the scope of this reference guide. I refer the reader to the relevant provision cited in the endnote⁶ and to the papers listed in the first end note for a fuller treatment of the issue.

The last caveat before proceeding to the chart outlining relevant limitation periods is that when determining a relevant limitation period counsel should consider whether equitable and common law doctrines of special circumstances, laches and fraudulent concealment may result in the stay or extension of limitation periods. Please see the articles listed in endnote i for a full discussion of these doctrines.

In the section that follows I have set out the most prevalent limitation periods that arise in estates and trusts law.

Cause of Action	Limitation Period	Statute and case law
Will Challenge	Arguably 2 years from the date of death, subject to discoverability principle.	Although there has been debate on this subject, the most recent pronouncement in Leibel v. Leibel strongly suggests that the Limitations Act, 2002 applies to will challenges. In Leibel, the challenger commenced his application 2 years after both (a) the testatrix had died, and (b) he had received a copy of the will. Greer J. held that the action was out of time.⁷
Breach of Fiduciary Duty	2 years	Limitations Act, 2002, Boyce v. Toronto Police Services Board 2012 ONCA 230 (“Boyce”), leave to appeal dismissed stands for the proposition that the Limitations Act 2002 applies breach of fiduciary duty.
Fraud, misrepresentation and breach of fiduciary duty.	2 years	Limitations Act, 2002; Portuguese Canadian C.U. v. Piress & Hipel Estate, Re 2011 CarswellOnt 9000, 2011 ONSC 5259, 70 E.T.R. (3d) 149, 207 A.C.W.S. (3d) 179, 108 O.R. (3d) 220 stands for proposition that the Limitations Act limitation period applies.
Application to compel an accounting	Arguably 2 years	Jacques v. The Canada Trust Company, 2011 O.N.S.C. 5259, CanLII⁸.
Application to pass accounts / Claim for compensation by attorney for property under section 40 of the Substitute Decisions Act or by trustee under section 23 of the Trustee Act	No limitation period for the attorney’s claim for compensation, but the equitable doctrines of laches and acquiescence apply. In the ordinary course the attorney/estate trustee commences an application to pass accounts and if the beneficiary has objections s/he files a notice of objection. In Wall Estate,⁹ the applicant did not dispute his obligation to provide an accounting. He argued that given the limitation period he was not obliged to respond to the objections. On the facts specific to that case, the Court found that the notice of objection to accounts filed by a beneficiary was not a “claim” within the meaning of the Limitations Act, 2002. In other words, there was no limitation period associated with it.	Armitage v. Salvation Army, 2016 ONCA 971 ¹⁰; Wall Estate, 2018 ONSC 1735,/p>
Support	6 months from grant of certificate of appointment– no application for support under Part V of SLRA may be made after months from probate¹¹	Section 61(1) Succession Law Reform Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. S.26
Support	Exception to six month limitation period. The court may allow an application to be made at any time as to any portion of the estate remaining undistributed at the date of the application.	Section 61(2) Succession Law Reform Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. S.26
Rectification Claims	2 years	The Estate of Blanca Esther Robinson stands for the proposition that rectification claims are subject to the Limitations Act 2002.¹²
Constructive Trust	for land claims 10 year limitation period	McConnell v. Huxtable stands for the proposition that section 4 of the RPLA did apply to the facts of this case because as it was a claim to recover lands.
Constructive Trust	No limitation period For non-land claims as long as trustee is alive	In McConnell v. Huxtable Perkins J. concluded sections 4 and 5 of the Limitations Act, 2002 does not apply to constructive trust claims in family law. I presume his logic applies to estate claims as well.
Constructive Trust	2 years from the death of the trustee or of the plaintiff.	Section 38 of the Trustee Act
Negligence of the Trustee	2 years from discovery or 15 years from the negligent acts, whichever is first.	The Limitations Act 2002
Negligence of the Trustee	2 years from the death of the trustee or the beneficiary.	Section 38 of the Trustee Act
Negligence claim against drafting solicitor	2 years from discovery 15 years from date of the Will.¹³	The 2002 Limitations Act.
Negligence claim against drafting solicitor	2 years from the death of the trustee or of the plaintiff.	Section 38 of the Trustee Act
Family Law Act Election¹⁴	Six months to make Election¹⁵– The surviving spouse’s election must be filed in the office of the Estate Registrar for Ontario within six months after the first spouse’s death.	Section 6(10) Family Law Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. F.3
Family Law Act Election	Six months/2 years/6 years to make Application – Part of the process to elect a division of net family property is an application. It has to be brought the earlier of 2 years after the marriage is terminate by divorce, six years after separation and there is no reasonable prospect of cohabitation or six months after the first spouses death.	Section 7(3) Family Law Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. F.3
Family Law Act Election	Distribution Restricted – 6 months. No distribution within six months of the spouse’s death, without written consent of surviving spouse or court order.	Section 6(14) Family Law Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. F.3
Actions against executors and administrators for torts. Except in cases of libel and slander.	2 years from Deceased’s death.	See sections 38(2 &(3)Trustee Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. T.23
Vesting of real estate	3 years from Date of death	Section 9(1) & 17(5) of Estates Administration Act R.S.O. 1990, CHAPTER E.22

Footnotes

I have found a number of articles very useful which I believe are worthwhile to review. There are listed in order of most recently published:
- “Limitation Periods in Estate and Trust Litigation” an article presented by Michael W. Kerr and Kimberly Whaley at the Step Canada 15^th National conference June 10-11, 2013.
- “Limitation Periods in estate Litigation” presented by Archie Rabinowitz at the September 13, 2012 LSUC lectures Practice Gems: The Administration of Estates 2012.
- “Limitations and Claims by Beneficiaries” presented by Anne Werker’s at the LSUC’s 10th Annual Estate and Trusts Summit as well as Ms. Werker’s article “Limitations Periods in Ontario and claims by beneficiary published in “The Advocates’ Quarterly” volume 34, Number 1 February 2008,
- “Understanding Limitation Periods” by Justin W. De Vries found in the Probater, Volume 10, Number 4, August 2006,
- “Limitations Periods in Estate Matters” by Brian A. Schnurr found in Schnurr Estate Litigation, 2^nd Ed.
- “Limitations Act 2002: A huge reform of existing law” an article written by Graeme Mew of Gowling Lafleur Henderson LLP. He has also authored a text The Law of Limitations, 2nd Edition dealing with statutory and common law rules governing limitation periods. Chapter 16 deals with Estate matters.
↵
There are some limitation period set out in this short paper that are not red lines and the statute provides the court with discretion to extend those limitation period. For example, under the Succession Law Reform the statute provides that the court may extend the 6 month limitation period. A similar provision is set out in the Family Law Act. ↵
For example, if a sexual assaults takes places before January 1, 2004 there is no limitation period. ↵
For some quick reference guides and transition Charts. Please see
- http://www.practicepro.ca/practice/pdf/TransitionRulesChart.pdf This chart was prepared by Pat Peloso and Jennifer Arrigo, both of Gowling Lafleur Henderson LLP. It was adapted from a chart that originally appeared in the materials distributed on June 11, 2003, at the Law Society of Ontario/Ontario Bar Association’s ontinuing Legal EducationProgramme entitled “The Limitations Act, 2002: Learn the New Rules before Time Runs Out”,
- http://www.practicepro.ca/practice/pdf/LimitationsChartComparison2005.pdf : This table examines how limitation and notice periods under the new Limitations Act, 2002,differ from those in effect under previous legislation. It has been compiled by Tony Antoniou, articling student with LAWPRO, based on a table of commonlyencountered limitation and notice periods originally prepared for LAWPRO by Graeme Mew of Gowling Lafleur Henderson LLP. This new table also has been reviewed by Mr. Mew.
- pages 57 & 58 of “Limitations and Claims by Beneficiaries” presented by Anne Werker’s at the LSUC’s 10th Annual Estate and Trusts Summit as well as Ms. Werker’s article “Limitations Periods in Ontario and claims by beneficiary published in “The Advocates’ Quarterly” volume 34, Number 1 February 2008
↵
There are exceptions to this rule. For example in Giroux Estate v. Trillium Health Centre the Ontario Court of Appeal applied the doctrine of fraudulent concealment to stay the running of the limitation period. For a short review of this doctrine see page 21 of Ms Whaley and Mr. Kerr’s article listed in endnote i. ↵
section 5 of the Limitation Periods Act

5. (1) A claim is discovered on the earlier of,

(a) the day on which the person with the claim first knew,

(i) that the injury, loss or damage had occurred,

(ii) that the injury, loss or damage was caused by or contributed to by an act or omission,

(iii) that the act or omission was that of the person against whom the claim is made, and

(iv) that, having regard to the nature of the injury, loss or damage, a proceeding would be an appropriate means to seek to remedy it; and

(b) the day on which a reasonable person with the abilities and in the circumstances of the person with the claim first ought to have known of the matters referred to in clause (a). 2002, c. 24, Sched. B, s. 5 (1).

Presumption

(2) A person with a claim shall be presumed to have known of the matters referred to in clause (1) (a) on the day the act or omission on which the claim is based took place, unless the contrary is proved. 2002, c. 24, Sched. B, s. 5 (2)

↵
Prior to the most recent case law referred to in the chart, senior counsel suggested that based on section 16(1)(a) it was arguable that a will challenge is essentially a declaration with no consequential relief and is therefore not subject to any limitation period. For a review of this issue see page 26 of Anne Werker’s article and page 20 of Archie Rabinowitz’s article listed in endnote 1. Their argument was consistent with the approach in Oestreich v. Burnnhuber, (2001) CarswellOnt 273 (S.C.J.) at para.17 regarding the then Limitations Act. There the Court said that the Act did not relate to the declaring of a will to be valid or invalid, pointing out that the beneficiary who delays in attacking the will runs the risk that the assets may have already been distributed. In her decision quoted in the chart Greer J. mentions, but does not distinguish Oestreich. Perhaps it was not fully argued at trial. In fact, there is Court of Appeal authority on this point.

In Kenzie v. Kenzie, 2010 ONSC 4360 (S.C.), the deceased’s son brought an application for directions under Rule 75.06 relating to the validity of his father’s will. The date of death was 2004; the application was 2010. Healey J. dismissed the application as being out of time under the Limitations Act, 2002. At the Court of Appeal, the son argued that he was only seeking declaratory relief under s. 16(1)(a) of the Limitations Act, 2002. The Court of Appeal held per curiam:

(1) The appellant argues that he is entitled to declaratory relief, and that under s. 16(1)(a) of the Limitations Act, there is no limitation period barring his application. We do not agree with the appellant’s argument.

(2) Implicit, if not explicit, in the appellant’s application is his intent to seek a finding or findings that would be res judicata in other proceedings. In our view, that is consequential relief, which takes the appellant’s application out of s. 16(1)(a) of the Limitations Act. Therefore, we agree with the application judge that this application as framed on this record is statute barred.

There is an interesting discussion of what constitutes declaratory relief and consequential relief in Middlesex Condo Corp. No. 643 v. Prosperity Homes Ltd., 2014 ONSC 1406 (S.C.) at paras. 50-54.

↵
The suggestion made in this blog is that solicitors should treat the obligation to compel a passing of accounts as falling within the two-year limitation period. This suggestion is out of an abundance of caution. It’s generally accepted that there is
- no mandatory legal requirement to pass accounts;
- no legislative direction about the timing for a passing of accounts.
According to Justin De Vries, a respected senior counsel whose practice is restricted to estate litigation, “the one situation where there may be some onus on the beneficiary to demand that an executor pass his or her accounts immediately is when the executor dies without having passed his/her accounts… once estate accounts have been prepared, it seems reasonable that the beneficiaries have two years in which to make a claim for damages..” Kimberly Whaley, a respected certified specialist in estates and trusts law noted that “In the decision in Syndicate Number 963 (Crowe) v. Acuret Underwriter Inc., 2009 CanLII 51195 (ONSC) it was accepted that the 2 year limitation period under the Limitations Act 2002, applied to an action arising out of a failure to account for trust funds. This is important when looking at estate accountings.” In another article Ms. Whaley writes, “The new basic two-year limitation period suggests it may even be prudent to ensure applications to compel accounts be brought within that time.” In other words, it seems as if that when there is a triggering event like the death of an executor or possibly his incapacity of an executor or a demand for a passing that has not been complied with logic suggests that the two year limitation period ought to have started running.

To the best of my knowledge there is no case that definitively answers the question about whether the two year limitation period set in the Limitations Act, 2002, S.O. 2002, c. 24, Sched. B applies to an application to compel a passing of accounts. Even if a court were to determine that section 16(1) of the Act applies because an application to have an executor/power of attorney pass their accounts is “a declaration where no consequential relief is sought”, it does not make sense for the obligation to account to exist in perpetuity. Whether it is the two year period set out under the legislation or another time frame only the litigation of the issue will determine. In Hipel Estate, Re 2011 CarswellOnt 9000, 2011 ONSC 5259, 70 E.T.R. (3d) 149 at paragraph 38 the court accepted the proposition that while there is both a statutory and common law obligation to keep records for some period of time, the common law does not impose that obligation in perpetuity. In this case the estate trustee could not be faulted for not having kept records for 27 years. In my view, it logically follows that not having to keep records means not having to account because how can one be expected to account without the vouchers necessary to do the accounting. The open question is how long is too long? For some more detailed dealings with this issue I refer the reader to Kimberly Whaley’s article, “Fiduciary Accounts And Court Passings” which can be accessed on line at http://whaleyestatelitigation.com/resources/WEL_Passing_of_Fiduciary_Accounts_Revised_Feb_2012.pdf and Justin De Vries’ blog at http://www.devrieslitigation.com/resources/passing_of_accounts.html. See also endnote 9 (regarding Armitage v. Salvation Army, 2016 ONCA 971 and the limitation period applicable to an application to pass accounts (as contrasted to an application to compel an attorney or trustee to account). ↵
According to Wall Estate, 2018 ONSC 1735, this determination is fact-specific. If the passing of accounts does not constitute a “claim” as contemplated by the Limitations Act, 2002, then the Notice of Objection to Accounts is not a claim and not subject to the two year limitation period. A factor that may be taken into account by the courts in making this determination is whether the objector stands to gain immediately from the objection, or whether the objection will only result in a contingent benefit to the objector if successful. In the latter scenario, it has been held that the Notice of Objection did not rise to the level of a “claim”.
Application of the doctrines of laches and/or acquiescence in the context of a Notice of Objection is also fact specific. It has been held that an estate trustee may not strike a beneficiary’s Notice of Objection on the basis of these principles where the estate trustee did not follow best practices i.e. obtain formal releases from the beneficiaries or pass accounts each year. ↵
Armitage v. Salvation Army, 2016 ONCA 971 dealt with an application by an attorney for property for a claim for compensation from the estate of the deceased grantor. The beneficiary of the estate (the Salvation Army) resisted the attorney’s claim for compensation on a limitations argument, on the basis that the attorney had not claimed annual compensation as provided for by section 40(1) of the Substitute Decisions Act, 1992. It argued that each year of the attorney’s service triggered the beginning of a two-year limitation period for the attorney to claim compensation, and that because the attorney had not claimed compensation until nearly two years following the death of the grantor, a large portion of the compensation claimed was statute-barred.

At paragraph 27 of the decision, the Ontario Court of Appeal stated as follows:

…in seeking court approval of the passing of accounts, an attorney for property is not seeking redress for any loss, injury, or damage. Rather, he or she is seeking approval from the court of his or her actions in managing the property, including approval for compensation previously taken or now sought. A passing of accounts application is the opposite of remedial; it is a process that seeks a court order that no remedy is necessary with respect to the accounts…

The court went on to hold, further, that an application for the passing of accounts does not arise as the result of an “action or omission”, as required by the Limitations Act, 2002. The court held that for these reasons, a passing of accounts under theSubstitute Decisions Act, 1992 is not subject to the two-year limitations period found in the Limitations Act, 2002, and it went on to hold that the enactment of the Limitations Act, 2002 did not change the common law in that regard. Therefore, the only defences available are the equitable defences of laches and acquiescence, neither of which had been asserted in the case. In a footnote to paragraph 29 of the decision, W. Hourigan J.A., writing for a unanimous court, made the following commentary:

I do not mean to categorically provide that the Limitations Act, 2002 has no applicability to the passing of accounts process under the SDA. In particular, it may be that the filing by a beneficiary of a notice of objection after an attorney has sought a passing of accounts is a claim within the meaning of the Limitations Act, 2002. However, I leave this determination to another case where it arises directly on the facts.

While the above holding in Armitage was restricted to an application to pass of accounts by an attorney for property (there being no limitation issue arising, on the facts, from the claim for estate trustee compensation), the reasoning of the Ontario Court of Appeal would apply equally to claims for compensation under section 23 of the Trustee Act. ↵
Estate Trustees who distribute prior to the expiry of the six month limitation period may be held personally liable. See Re Dentinger 1981, 10 E.T.R. 6 (Ont. Surr. Ct.). ↵
See section 4 of the Limitations Act,2002. Claim may be barred by the doctrine of laches. ↵
The limitation periods are suspended if the disappointed beneficiary is subject to a disability. ↵
Pursuant to the Family Law Act R.S.O. 1990, c.F3, the surviving spouse may choose not to take under the Will (or under the laws of intestacy as the case may be) and instead choose to elect for an equalization of net family property (“NFP”). ↵
The FLA permits an extension of the limitation period under certain circumstances. See section 6(16) ↵

Charles Wagner and Brendan Donovan

The authors of this blog are Charles Wagner and Brendan Donovan. Charles is a Certified Specialist in Estates and Trusts and partner at Wagner Sidlofsky LLP and Brendan was a partner.

This Toronto office is a boutique litigation law firm whose practice is focused on estate and commercial litigation.

Rule 7 and a Case Review of Tipu v. Munchi

January 17, 2025

Read Post

Retraction of Gift Disclaimer – There’s a Ketch

September 6, 2024

Read Post

Revocation of Election Under the Family Law Act – a case review of Iasenza v. Iasenza

April 17, 2024

Read Post

Are Doctors above the Law? The case of Wawrzyniak v. Livingstone

March 12, 2024

Read Post

This blog is not intended to serve as a comprehensive treatment of the topic. It is not meant to be legal advice. Every case turns on its specific facts and it would be a mistake for the reader of this blog to conclude how it might impact on the reader’s case. Nothing replaces retaining a qualified, competent lawyer, well versed in this niche area of practice and getting some good legal advice.

Recent Estate Law Posts

17Jan 25

Rule 7 and a Case Review of Tipu v. Munchi

06Sep 24

Retraction of Gift Disclaimer – There’s a Ketch

17Apr 24

Revocation of Election Under the Family Law Act – a case review of Iasenza v. Iasenza

12Mar 24

Are Doctors above the Law? The case of Wawrzyniak v. Livingstone

16Feb 24

The Case Conference: A Powerful Tool For Efficiency in Guardianship Applications

Dre Nnamdi

19:11 15 Aug 24

Spoke to Charles and he served me some cold hard truth about my situation with my home and mortgage. Even though it’s hard to hear, it’s the best no-bullshit advice & consultation I’ve got. Thanks a lot Charles!& Thanks Bradley for the referral, much appreciated. Great team!

Tammy Ferraro

20:05 29 Jul 24

The passing of 2 family members within three months of each other was unbearable, especially when it's a sibling and a parent. Having to navigate the estate by myself was intimidating and new territory. Self-education and asking the right questions to my legal team allowed me to see the light at the end of the tunnel. Just before the first anniversary, I received a notice that a civil litigation suit was being brought against me for my inheritance based out of Eastern Ontario. Living in Northern Ontario, I could not find anyone to take the case. I searched the internet for firms specializing in estate law. I reached out to Wagner Sidlofsky LLP. The following day, I was connected with Mr. Peter Nuefeld. His professionalism, kind words, and direction helped give me a sense of calm and strength. Following his requests felt accessible and empowering. My questions and concerns were answered and address always. The result was positive, as the suit was dropped. My gratitude to this firm and Mr. Neufeld will never be forgotten. Lastly, I would like to thank Mr. Robert Addario, the Law Clerk, for taking my phone calls and emails. Your kindness has not gone unnoticed.

Anastasia kostopoulos

19:44 19 Oct 23

As an Urban Planner, I accomplish excellence in each project by acknowledging its unique qualities. It is rare to find a Lawyer these days that treats and resolves their cases with that attribute in mind. Charles Wagner has done just that! He listens, then uses critical thinking skills and combines them with the pertinent legal framework available in order to provide a practical, essential solution to the case involved. If you are looking for professionalism with essence and straight forward solutions, this is your law firm.

Sun Chara

19:09 12 Sep 23

Wonderful!!! I'd left a message for Mr. Wagner, and he called me back same day. He answered my questions about the probate case I'm going through, offered insight, and gave me hope! Tough, knowledgeable, kind...he will be your advocate!

Roma Baran

19:18 18 May 23

Hershel Sahian = Tenacious, ProfessionalExcellence Exemplified !!Our case involved a dispute with our neighbour who refused to pay his one-half share of the cost of reconstruction of our division fence, as well as his refusal to move a wrongly situated shed between our properties.Despite numerous requests and our serving him with a Notice Letter, he refused to resolve matters amicably, and hired a paralegal in an attempt to intimidate us. At this point, we decided it was time to pull out the big guns. We called Hershel !Without hesitation, Hershel issued a Claim with the Small Claims Court and filed a Complaint with the City regarding the shed. Upon inspection, the City ordered the neighbour to move his shed.A Settlement Conference was set by the Court to deal with the non-payment for the fence. Interestingly, the neighbour was now being represented by his daughter, not the paralegal. Just days prior to the Settlement Conference, the neighbour offered to settle the matter for an amount less than what was now owing. Hershel refused to entertain such an offer and demanded full damages, interest and costs.At the Settlement Conference, in addition to an Order that the neighbour pay full damages, interest and costs, Hershel requested a formal Judgment against the neighbour. During the Conference, the neighbour’s daughter attempted to elicit sympathy from the Court, repeating several times the fact that she had no legal training. The Judge was reluctant to grant the Judgement, however, Hershel would not take “no” for an answer and advised we were fully prepared to proceed to trial.The result? The Judge made the Order, granted the Judgment, and the neighbour paid the full damages, interest and costs.Hershel always kept us fully advised. He made his position to the opposing side clear from day one and never wavered from his course of action, Hershel is tenacious, yet conducted himself in a highly professional manner throughout the litigation process.Hershel brings years of experience in many areas of law to the table. We are grateful for his counsel and have no hesitation in highly recommending him to anyone looking for a greatcounsellor and litigator.Thank you Hershel !!!Roma & Michael Baran

John Collins

21:16 17 Apr 23

Further to having been appointed as Executor of a deceased relative's Will, who had been a resident of the United States, I was faced with the daunting task of administering a rather complicated estate.The situation was further compounded by the fact I live in the United Kingdom and a number of the interests were located in different countries. One of which was a savings account held with TD Canada Trust and contained a considerable sum.Upon initial contact with TD's estates department I quickly learned why this particular institution had earned a reputation for being notoriously difficult and obstructive when dealing with such matters.Confronted by such surreptitious practices I decided to seek legal counsel.Having been attracted by Wagner and Sidlofsky's online reviews and an equally impressive initial consultation with David Wagner, I had no hesitation in enlisting the firm's services.Ably assisted by Mady Kinnear, I experienced what can only be described as an exemplary standard of professionalism. All communications were concise, clear and extremely prompt.David's experience in conjunction with his attention to detail anticipated every difficulty and allayed any concerns I had previously held regarding a satisfactory outcome.Words cannot express the gratitude and appreciation I will always have for the impeccable support I received throughout the process.Consequently, I highly recommend the firm of Wagner Sidlofsky to any other prospective clients.

Angie Carboni

07:21 08 Nov 22

Dear MuktaI can’t thank both of you at Wagner Sidlofsky enough, for the sound advice that you gave me today, during my free consultation, regarding my application, and process in my becoming my mothers power of attorney (legal guardian).I truly appreciated the honesty, pertaining to the application which I made, with the Ontario’s guardian and public trustee, you both truly gave me peace of mind regarding how I should proceed.Something that is not regularly found these days, but much needed in these times. Once again thank you and God bless both of you. I highly recommend your services to anyone who needs honest objective sound advice that think of your clients needs, before your own financial needs.SincerelyAngela Carboni

christine labelle

16:31 29 Aug 22

The decision to work with any law firm can be quite overwhelming. I recently worked with James regarding an issue after the death of a treasured family member. After questionable use of funds by the power of attorney, the decision was made to file a civil suit. James Dunphy is extremely knowledgeable and kind. My questions, concerns, phone calls and emails were always promptly returned. He helped me feel empowered and supported to see this issue through to completion. I would highly recommend this law firm and James in particular, for the high level of professionalism. Thank you to Mr. Wagner for connecting James and myself.

G Ing

17:42 11 Nov 21

James Dunphy and Brad Phillips worked on my family's estate litigation case and I was not only pleased with the result but, was impressed with the level of focus and detail that they invested in representing our family's interests.James is a pragmatic lawyer who analyzes every detail presented to him and is exceptionally articulate. Clearly, he outranks the competition by leaps and bounds.Brad's extensive experience and strategic thinking was instrumental in achieving our goals. He is candid and very approachable.I truly felt that we worked as a team and that I was respected as a client. I would not hesitate to refer this firm to those in need of litigation services.

Carol Spivak

22:27 06 Oct 21

Words cannot express what fine individuals David and Adin Wagner are. During a traumatic and turbulent moment in my life, David and Adin provided excellent, courteous and professional care. They corresponded with concise feedback and easily understood information. They were always available to provide support when needed, and gave me peace of mind . I never felt alone, they treated me with dignity, and gave me the confidence that my late husband’s estate would be looked after in a proper manner. Needless to say, my engagements with them ended with a very satisfactory outcome. I can’t recommend this law firm enough.

Anet Landoi

07:13 01 Jul 21

Hershel Sahian is an excellent lawyer. I would highly recommend him to anyone in need of a litigator. He took the initiative with my lawsuit. I never had to remind him, run after him or worry that he wasn’t paying attention to my case. He treated my case diligently and aggressively. There is no question that he will not allow his clients to be pushed around. I was very pleased with how quickly my lawsuit was resolved and the outcome exceeded my expectations. If you want a lawyer you can trust to fight for you, Hershel is the man who will get the job done.

Cristina C

17:05 12 May 21

The 5 start system does not do justice to Peter Askew who is outstanding all around: very knowledgeable, prompt , transparent in what he charges , detailed oriented and very bright. I have dealt with lawyers previously in my divorce and also for my current real estate litigation case, before I retained Peter A. He is in another league altogether. He worked on my case as soon as he was receiving documents from me , no delays, no excuses , no “ competing priorities”. Very honest and hard working . I love his humble demeanor contrasting with strong actions and documents . Peter A. thought of all possibilities that the counterpart could have come up with and he prepared for everything, nothing was left to chance . I expected way more trouble with my case but I think we were so well prepared that the counterpart did not have much chances. The bill at the end was fair and very detailed which is also quite rare.

Peter Qiao

23:13 25 Feb 21

I called to inquire about a possible litigation regarding a house which was purchased last year. They actually pick up the phone unlike many other firms, I had a lawyer call me back after just 2 hours. I was given a FREE consultation during which I was offered a sympathetic ear followed by informative and unbiased advices. Would certainly recommend them and call them back should I choose to proceed further.

Sabrina De Bartolo

15:41 15 Feb 21

Words cannot describe the professionalism and expertise we experienced through working with this firm. Charles Wagner is one of a kind. He provided us with sound, clear, and practical legal advice. When you are in distress, it is difficult to think clearly and make good decisions.Charles explained the law, outlined in clear language the steps in the process that where needed to be done. He was reassuring, articulate, knowledgeable and effective. Charles made the process so much easier and gave us peace of mind in a stressful but successful outcome. If I could give this firm more than 5 stars I would! Thank you!

Khaled Elzaabalawi

07:23 10 Dec 20

Wagner Sidlofsky LLP is a very highly professional and dedicated Law Firm. The team is very highly qualified with strong negotiation skills. In my personal opinion I consider my case to be a study case in Breach of contract from the seller's part , The team helped me out to achieve a very satisfactory deal through their experience and skills which saved me a very lengthy litigation. I highly recommend their consultations in any case which may require negotiation and litigation.

Karen Pillon

04:35 24 Nov 20

We have been dealing with Wagner Sidlofsky LLP for the past 3 years. I am extremely grateful to this firm for guiding & directing our family through a difficult litigation. Our case was won by highly skilled & professional litigators Bradley Philips & David Wagner. This firm has a lot of expertise in Estate Law & litigation matters.

A Google User

14:21 14 Sep 20

I recently used them. They were exceptionally efficient, and timely. Emails were ALAWYS answered within one business day, often the same day. The advice that Charles Wagner & James Dunphy gave always practical, and the options they presented were cost effective.I highly recommend Wagner Sidlofsky

A Turner

19:51 02 Sep 20

Great client service , extremely friendly , punctual and knowledgeable.No charge for a phone consult , very nice & informative.I will definitely keep them in my contact list.

Sunita Cooper

18:17 30 Jun 20

Amazing lawyers. Extremely responsive. We dealt with Gregory and David. Anytime we called they answered right away with the exception of only one or two times. The times we left a voicemail, our call was returned within the same hour or less. Both David and Gregory were both very upfront on all matters. In only my personal opinion, they are not in the business of taking advantage or wasting a client's time or money. They are realistic, straight to the point, and honest. Amazing job gentlemen! If you want professionalism, honesty and someone who will go above and beyond for your interests, this is definitely the firm to trust.

Aysha Kolyada

02:10 29 Feb 20

Within 10min of leaving a message requesting consultation on enforcement of foreign judgements in Ontraio; Mr. James Dunphy gave me a call and answered all my questions. Excellent service and highly recommended. Thank you so much for your time and knowledge. MO

21:45 11 Dec 19

Normally, I don’t write reviews. However, you are likely doing what I had to do; conducting an investigation to find the right law firm in an ocean of law firms. I live in New York and I wanted expert legal representation in Canada. I retained the firm of Wagner Sidlofsky LLP.My case involved Estate Litigation with a member of my own family in Canada and I imagine that these types of cases can be even more challenging since there are personal and emotional aspects.Following his initial assessment, Charles Wagner identified key considerations for pursuing a legal course but made clear that all decisions were mine to take without pretense of guarantees. This principal was always implicitly understood.All actions that were taken were discussed and agreed upon in alignment with our overall game plan so that I always felt matters were entirely under control. Communications were two-way. They didn’t waste my time and were very responsive to the invariable twists in the road.Wagner Sidlofsky LLP is a professional, pro-active team offering expert, value-added legal services that you might only read about - as it happens, in a review.

Miwha Stevenson

17:44 28 Oct 19

Most of us seek legal resolution as a last recourse, when we are in a dark place, feeling betrayed and disappointed by those whom we had trusted. Talking to Mr. Charles Wagner left me with a renewed hope for humanity, and I am not being frivolous when I make that statement. Not only was he deeply engaged in thinking through my situation as a legal predicament, an attentiveness that clearly stems from his professional expertise and long experience, but perhaps more importantly, he demonstrated in action how someone would help a complete stranger for no other reason than to do the right thing out of the goodness of his heart. It was much more than a professional consultation, and I will always be most grateful to Mr. Wagner for showing me an example of the kindly and the righteous.

Toras Emes

18:32 27 Oct 19

We were extremely happy with the service and first rate legal advice provided to us by the staff at Wagner Sidlofsky. We could not have been happier with the resolution of our case.

Rob Fairlie

21:00 11 Oct 19

I recently met with Mr. Wagner, Mr. Stroh, and Mr. Askew for a consultation. I was very impressed with their knowledge, professionalism and honesty. I highly recommend them to anyone in need of their services.

Rosedale Child

11:24 16 Aug 19

I am very impressed with Mr Charles Wagner.Initially, I emailed him last night at 10:09 pm asking to meet him today for consultations.He immediately replied (in 25 minutes, at 10:34 pm!) instructing me to call his assistant to book an appointment with her phone number included.When I emailed his assistant this early morning at 7:25 am, she immediately replied (at 8:26 am) before their office even opened, offering me an appointment for today at 1 pm!When I met Mr Charles Wagner (today 2019-08-15) I was impressed with his expertise in estate litigation and professionalism.Furthermore, he showed kindness and compassion for my situation and very clearly explained to me my options.He gave me excellent and most helpful referral for my specific needs.It amazed me that he genuinely cared to help me and was most helpful and honest, pleasant and patient, a great listener.I would highly recommend Mr Charles Wagner to anybody who needs excellent, experienced and friendly lawyer.Definitely a shinning 5 star rating!

Stephane Li

16:54 16 Jul 19

Hershel and I have worked together for nearly 10 years. He is extremely knowledgeable and will never shy away from a challenge. He has a great ability to read situations and anticipate what may come next. You can always count on Hershel to give you his honest legal opinion on a matter. Time over time his honesty and willingness to succeed for his client has benefited my interests and actions. I would recommend Hershel to anyone seeking legal counsel!

Sven Steindorff

14:23 02 Jul 19

Hershel Sahian joined Wager Sidlofsky LLP earlier in 2019. I have known Hershel professionally and personally for over 15 years. He is very a very patient listener and knowledgeable counsel. If you have legal issues with insurers in Canada or USA or just need some legal advice, give him a call first. I can only recommend Hershel to anyone. His vast legal experience will be on your side from day one you contact him.

Alicia Bickle

15:56 24 Jun 19

I live out of Province and was in the market for an estate litigation lawyer in Ontario. Charles Wagner returned my call promptly and was extremely professional over the phone. He was honest with me that he was not the best fit for my case and went above and beyond to provide referrals that he trusted. He was also able to provide an outline of questions that I should ask others about my case. Wonderful service and would definitely recommend to others whose cases fit their profile.

TeddyBarnett1

03:21 21 Jun 19

I had a very productive meeting with Charles Wagner, he provided legal counsel. He is very knowledgeable and experienced lawyer and very honest. He was very helpful and informative, he gave me a lot of valuable advice regarding my litigation case, I recommend him fully.Edward Barnett

Jorge Roldán

01:48 21 Jun 19

I had a very productive meeting with Charles Wagner, he provided legal counsel. He is a very knowledgeable and experienced lawyer and very honest. He was very helpful and informative, he gave me a lot of valuable advise regarding my litigation case, I recommend him.Edward Barnett.

18:22 20 Jun 19

C S

17:30 05 Jun 19

We would like to thank Mr. Matthew Stroh and Mr. Charles Wagner for their superb handling of our trust dispute.From the beginning, Matt clearly understood the dynamics in play and was able to articulate and argue the legalities of our position.The case went to mandatory mediation and on that day we were pleased that both Matt and Charles were present.As the negotiations progressed throughout the day, in mid afternoon Charles came up with brilliant strategy that brought this process to a speedy conclusion and secured an agreement with which we were very happy.We would highly recommend this firm, and in particular, Charles Wagner and Matthew Stroh to anyone in need of a strong and assertive litigation team.Christine S.

Ana Allcott

19:03 14 May 19

I met with Charles Wagner and James Dunphy today for a sensitive family matter. They understood immediately the complexities of my situation and could give a number of solutions to help me deal with the issue. It was an efficient and very helpful meeting. I would enthusiastically recommend this firm. Thank you

Joanne Brown

16:34 20 Mar 19

March 20, 2019 after contemplating making this call for many weeks I finally contacted Wagner Sidlofsky seeking advice on how to proceed with obtaining a copy of my fathers will. When I called the receptionist who was very pleasant, asked for some information and told me I would receive a call as soon as someone was available. Within 30 minutes I had the pleasure of speaking to Mr. Charles Wagner. I explained what I was after and throughout our conversation he asked questions of me that I really hadn't thought about. I appreciated the time he took to give me food for thought excellent advice.Mr. Wagners' compassion, professionalism and honesty is very much appreciated. Consoling someone crying on the phone, who he had never met. I am so glad I made the call to this law firm and I am grateful for the conversation that I had with Mr. Wagner.I would definitely contact this law firm again should I require any legal services.Thank you Charles Wagner. You made sense of it all.Kind RegardsJoanne

Areej Mirza

19:38 07 Mar 19

Our estate case was being handled by the firm. Brad Phillips was thorough in his investigation and Charles Wagner gave us direction through the case. The team handling our case - Brad & Aaron, were insightful, thoughtful and hardworking for the entire duration. I believe that they genuinely felt empathetic towards our case.

Liliana Speciale

19:41 28 Feb 19

We were clients of Wagner Sidlofsky LLP for about a year. The service was excellent and Mr. Wagner’s manner of conducting business was at our level of expectation. His team at the law firm was a great support to our litigation. We went through difficult times and Mr. Wagner’s capacity of dealing with our legal issues was great. We would recommend his law firm to everyone, he has the best support in any ways not only legal but also moral, as a friend.Thank you.Anthony P. SpecialeLiliana Speciale

Keith Marshall

16:20 06 Feb 19

David Wagner and Greg Sidlofsky and all of the staff at Wagner Sidlofsky have been exceptional. They have been professional, courteous, patient, knowledgeable and have always had our needs in mind. I wouldn’t hesitate to refer them.

Patrick D

19:42 15 Jan 19

Mr. Wagner was genuinely a big help to me. I appreciated his directness and keeping our conversation on-track so that I'd come away with the information I really needed to proceed. Much appreciated.

David Brook

11:58 24 Sep 18

Charles Wagner and his junior, Matthew Stroh couldn't have been more helpful. They explained everything clearly enough for us to understand our options in full. Thank you.

Fahra Zommers

13:02 20 Jul 18

I would like to take this opportunity to thank Charles Wagner, David Wagner and Kim Gale for the legal services you provided me. I am truly impressed with your legal expertise and your compassion. You were personable, courteous and kind. You are extremely knowledgable, competent and expeditious while still trying to save me money and time. You are honest and fair and your skills at negotiating are outstanding! Words cannot describe how thankful and grateful I am. I would highly recommend your law firm to anyone seeking legal advice or litigation services.

Irwin Meisles

19:32 07 Sep 17

I contacted Mr Wagner for assistance in drafting a will. Despite the fact that Mr Wagner is a Litigator and does not draft wills, he took the time to introduce me to another lawyer. During that conference call , he provided us with extremely valuable advice to avoid future litigation. I greatly appreciate the time and expertise that he provided free of charge. Thank you again Mr Wagner

Kao Jimmy

12:54 06 Jul 17

Charles was very professional, courteous, and honest - everything that one would expect a lawyer to be - when my family and I met with him for a consultation. He provided us with helpful information and described our options in detail, in a very pleasant manner. It would be an absolute pleasure for us to use his services in the future.

LB LB

21:39 14 Jun 17

At the recommendation of my business partner, I contacted and met with Charles Wagner who showed absolute professionalism and compassion in helping me to deal with stressfull situation to finalize the estate after losing the loved one...Unlike other law offices that I contacted recently, my concerns and questions were laid to rest with competence and straightforward recommendations. The office secretaries are efficient, fast and friendly. Thank you Charles