torture — Plaintiff seeking damages for battery, negligence
and breach of fiduciary duty — Action reconstituted as ordi-
nary action with multiple plaintiffs in 2006 — No limitation
period for breach of fiduciary duty existing in 2000 — That
cause of action extant when action was commenced and not
subsumed within any statute-barred claims for battery and
negligence — Therapy amounting to torture — Defendants
breaching their fiduciary duty to plaintiffs — Doctrine of
laches not applying.
BARKER V. BARKER ....................................................... (S.C.J.) 96
ONTARIO RECUEIL DE JURISPRUDENCE
REPORTS DE L’ONTARIO
Stephen M. Grant, L.S.M., LL.B.
C. Jane Arnup, LL.B.
Jamie Cameron, B.A., LL.B., LL.M.
Sandra A. Forbes, LL.B.
Vern Krishna, C.M., Q.C., F.R.S.C., LL.D.
Boris Krivy, Q.C., LL.B.
François J. Larocque, B.A., LL.B., Ph.D.
LexisNexis Editor Joseph Vincent Mobilio
© 2018 LAW SOCIETY OF ONTARIO © 2018 BARREAU DE L’ONTARIO
All rights reserved by the Law Society of Ontario. No part of this publication
may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, including
photocopying and recording, without the written permission of the copyright
holder, application for which should be addressed to the Law Society of Ontario.
Such written permission must also be obtained before any part of this publication is stored in a retrieval system of any nature.
Copies of individual decisions appearing in this Report may be made for
the purposes of research, private study, review, criticism or use in court, tribunal
and government proceedings.
Printed in Canada
Published weekly ISSN 0030-3089 Hebdomadaire
Edited under the authority of Publié avec l’autorisation du
The Law Society of Ontario Barreau de l’Ontario
by LexisNexis Canada Inc. par LexisNexis Canada Inc.