You just raised a point that I had some interest in. Two years is the typical limitation period for different causes of action, criminal or otherwise, in different provinces.
I've seen limitation legislation before that specifically said something to the effect of “at the time the claimant knew or ought to have known” rather than “after the time when the subject matter of the proceedings arose”.
I think that if you don't know until four years afterwards, I would hate to see the language we use prevent a claim from going forward. I think that's part of the harm Mr. Aubin was targeting.
This is probably for Mr. Langlois. Are we comfortable that the language will capture the discoverability principle?