 This video provides an explanation of the transition rules in British Columbia's New Limitation Act. In order to understand the transition rules, it's helpful to have a comparison of how time ran in the basic and ultimate limitation periods under the former act as compared to the new act. Under the former act, there were two different ultimate limitation periods, a general 30 year ultimate limitation period which applied to most claims and a 6 year ultimate limitation period which applied to medical malpractice and negligence claims against doctors, hospitals and hospital employees. The ultimate limitation period under the former act began to run from the accrual of the legal claim. Accrual occurred once all of the elements of the legal claim were present. For example, in a negligence claim, the ultimate limitation period would not start to run until both the negligent act and the damage had occurred because these are both elements of a claim in negligence. Under the former act, there were three different basic limitation periods, 2 years, 6 years and 10 years. The length of the basic limitation period depended upon what type of legal claim was being made. The basic limitation period ran from discovery in some cases, but in other cases it started to run from the date that all of the individual elements of the legal claim were present or the accrual of the legal claim. Now, under the new act, there is a single 15 year ultimate limitation period which applies to all claims. The ultimate limitation period runs from the act or remission on which the legal claim is based. There is a 2 year basic limitation period that applies to all claims unless the new act specifies otherwise. The 2 year basic limitation period runs from the date that the person discovers they have a legal claim. With this comparison of the basic and ultimate limitation periods in the former and new acts in mind, let's move on to the transition rules. Section 30 of the new act contains a transition clause. This clause ensures that people who have legal problems that existed before June 1, 2013 can still rely on the legal advice that was given to them before the new limitation act came into force. Remember, June 1, 2013 is the date that the new act came into force. When you look at the transition rules, you may be wondering when do these apply and how do they work? There are a few things to keep in mind. The first of which is that the transition rules only apply to pre-existing claims. A pre-existing claim is defined in the new act as a claim that is based upon an act or remission that occurred before June 1, 2013, but for which a court proceeding was not started before June 1, 2013. The transition rules apply to pre-existing claims if three things happen. First, the former ultimate limitation period that governed the claim under the former limitation act has not yet expired. Second, the act or remission on which the legal problem is based must have occurred before June 1, 2013. Third, the person has to discover that they have a claim on or after June 1, 2013. So, to summarize, you must have a former ultimate limitation period that has not yet expired, an act or remission that occurred under the former act, and discovery that occurred under the new act. If these three criteria are met, the transition rules will apply. Before we continue, please note that the transition rules do not apply if the act or remission occurred under the former act, but discovery also occurred under the former act. If this is the case, then the former limitation act continues to apply in its entirety. Similarly, if the act or remission occurs on or after June 1, 2013, and discovery also occurs on or after June 1, 2013, then the new act applies and the transition rules will not apply. So, what are transition rules? The transition rules govern two situations depending upon whether a plaintiff's claim would have been governed by the 30-year or 6-year ultimate limitation period under the former act. We will be looking at how the transition rules apply if a plaintiff's claim is against a doctor, hospital, or hospital employee, and would have been governed by the 6-year ultimate limitation period under the former act. If this is the case, the transition rules say that the former 6-year ultimate limitation period continues to apply. Time begins to run as it had under the former act, from the date that all of the elements of the legal claim were present or accrued. In a medical malpractice or negligence claim, this will be the date of damage. In essence, where a plaintiff's claim is against a doctor, hospital, or hospital employee, there is no change to how the ultimate limitation period runs under the transition rules. But when does the basic limitation period begin? The transition rules say that the 2-year basic limitation period applies from the date of discovery, unless the new act specifies otherwise. Here's an example to illustrate how the transition rules work for medical claims where the former ultimate limitation period was 6 years. Mary had a surgery on her stomach on June 1, 2012. However, it's not until June 1, 2014 that she becomes very sick and discovers that a sponge was left inside of her stomach during the surgery. Let's assume for this example that the date of damage is the date that Mary gets very sick. The act or omission date is the date of Mary's surgery, which occurred under the former act on June 1, 2012. Discovery occurred on June 1, 2014 under the new act, so the transition rules apply. Let's assume that Mary plans to sue her doctor for damages. Since this claim would have been governed by the former 6-year ultimate limitation period, the transition rules say that the 6-year ultimate limitation period will continue to apply, running from the accrual date. The accrual date is the date that all of the legal elements were present. In this case, the date that the damage occurred. So the 6-year ultimate limitation period begins on June 1, 2014. The transition rules also tell us that the 2-year basic limitation period under the new act applies, running from discovery. So, Mary will have 2 years beginning June 1, 2014 to sue her doctor.