In Roy v. North American Leisure Group Inc., the Ontario Court of Appeal had to consider choice of law rules.The plaintiffs had allegedly contracted an airborn virus on board a cruise ship. The operator had a choice of law clause in its contract selecting the law of England. The plaintiffs had missed the limitation period if the law of England applied.
The motion judge had determined that Canadian law applied. The Court of Appeal disagreed. Following Tolofson, the Court held that the "choice of substantive law is the law of the jurisdiction where the acitivity occurred".
In addressing the limitation period, the Court stated:
"[the] denial of the opportunity to claim damages by reason of the expiration of a limitation period does not constitute injustice sufficient to support an exception to the lex loci delicti rule."
10:57:07 PM 
| 
