Executive Summary: Key Legal and Evidentiary Issues

• Sampson claimed TD breached contract terms by ceasing rental coverage on September 29, 2020, while he still needed the vehicle.

• Enterprise reported the rental vehicle stolen on October 22, 2020, after Sampson failed to return it despite a demand letter.

• He was arrested by Constable Gary Fraser on October 28, 2020, after a 911 call from Enterprise employee Rebecca Benvie.

• Criminal charges against Sampson were dismissed on June 24, 2021, with the Crown calling no evidence.

• Defendants argued the civil claims were filed outside the applicable one- and two-year limitation periods under the Limitation of Actions Act and Municipal Government Act.

• The Court granted Sampson’s motion to disallow limitation period defences for claims involving personal injuries under s. 12(3) of the Limitation of Actions Act.

Background and incident chronology

Christopher Sampson was insured by TD Insurance Meloche Monnex and received a rental car from Enterprise Rent-A-Car on September 1, 2020, while his own vehicle was being repaired in Sydney, Nova Scotia. Initially due back on September 5, 2020, the rental was extended several times while TD agreed to cover costs. On September 21, 2020, TD informed Sampson that the rental coverage would end on September 29, 2020. A formal letter reiterating this was mailed to Sampson’s parents' address on October 8, 2020, stating he would be responsible for further costs beyond September 29.

Despite this, Sampson continued using the vehicle, arguing that TD had previously stated the rental would be “kind of unlimited” and refused to return it unless TD paid the full balance for the repairs. Enterprise delivered a demand letter to Sampson’s parents on October 14, 2020, warning that failure to return the vehicle would result in it being reported as stolen. Sampson told Enterprise he would return the car on October 19, but did not do so. Enterprise reported the vehicle as stolen to police on October 22.

On October 28, 2020, while Sampson was returning the car to the Enterprise location in Sydney, a 911 call from employee Rebecca Benvie alleged aggressive behavior. Constable Gary Fraser of the Cape Breton Regional Police Service arrested Sampson at 5:37 PM for breach of the peace and causing a disturbance. Sampson was handcuffed and detained. He was later charged with theft of a motor vehicle and causing a disturbance. The charges were dropped on June 24, 2021, when the Crown called no evidence.

Insurance and policy terms

TD’s September 21, 2020, email to Sampson stated that “The last date that your rental will be covered by TD insurance is seven business days from today, September 29, 2020.” TD later reiterated this in an October 8, 2020, mailed letter. Although Sampson referred to earlier verbal assurances that the rental period was flexible, the Court found that after September 29, 2020, it was unreasonable for him to believe he was legally entitled to retain the vehicle, particularly once Enterprise had demanded its return.

Legal claims

On June 15, 2023, Sampson filed a civil suit against multiple defendants:

1. TD Insurance – for breach of contract, negligence, and actionable false misrepresentations.

2. Enterprise and Rebecca Benvie – for negligence, falsely reporting the vehicle stolen, and acting as initiators of malicious prosecution.

3. Cape Breton Regional Municipality, Cape Breton Regional Police Service, and Gary Fraser – for vicarious liability, negligent investigation, false imprisonment/unlawful detention, violations of sections 7, 9 and 10(a) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, misfeasance in public office, malicious prosecution, abuse of process, defamation, and public placement in a false light.

Sampson also filed a Police Act complaint against Fraser on September 7, 2021. The Police Authority found Fraser committed two disciplinary defaults, including failing to meet reporting and disclosure obligations. Fraser accepted the disciplinary action but later filed for judicial review, which was dismissed as premature on May 23, 2023.

Limitation period defence and ruling

Defendants argued the claims were time-barred under several statutes:

• Two years under s. 8 of the Limitation of Actions Act.

• One year under s. 512 of the Municipal Government Act (for claims against CBRM/CBRPS).

• Contractual two-year limit under automobile insurance conditions for claims against TD.

The Court acknowledged that most causes of action, except the malicious prosecution claim against Enterprise and Benvie, were filed after their limitation periods expired. However, Justice Rosinski applied s. 12(3) of the Limitation of Actions Act, which allows a court to disallow limitation defences if hardship to the claimant outweighs hardship to the defendant, provided the claims relate to “personal injuries.”

Justice Rosinski found that Sampson’s pleadings sufficiently alleged personal injuries, including mental, psychological, and emotional harm. The Court ruled that the claims for false arrest, detention, Charter breaches, and malicious prosecution were “in respect of personal injuries” and thus eligible for relief under s. 12(3). Claims for defamation, breach of contract, and false light were excluded.

Outcome

The Court allowed Sampson’s personal injury-related claims to proceed despite being filed after the usual limitation periods. The ruling emphasized Sampson’s diligence in pursuing related legal processes (criminal defence and Police Act complaint), his good faith, and the absence of prejudice to defendants. The Court concluded that justice required disallowing the limitation period defences for those specific claims.