What is the relevant delay in the litigation?

In my opinion, this case more closely resembles De Marco v. Mascitelli, [2001] O.J. No. 3582 (S.C.J.), where there was no plaintiff misconduct, but the litigation had remained static for three-and-a-half years. Treating that longer period of relevant delay as “borderline”, the court declined to regard it as sufficient to warrant dismissal without evidence of prejudice: In my judgment the defendants in the within case have established that there has been delay that is longer than one would ordinarily hope. Although the plaintiffs herein did not strenuously argue the point, I believe the delay in the circumstances of this case is really borderline. It is no doubt longer than it should have been but it is not so long as to immediately assume that it must be prejudicial to a fair trial.