Ella Vitols

The plaintiff's motion to set aside a settlement agreement based on unproven allegations of fraud and misrepresentation was dismissed.

The defendants sought costs of $49,146.53 on a substantial indemnity basis, arguing the plaintiff's conduct was egregious.

The plaintiff, a self-represented litigant, argued no costs should be awarded.

The court declined to award substantial indemnity costs, finding the plaintiff's conduct did not reach the level of reprehensibility required, but awarded the defendants costs of $24,000 on a partial indemnity basis, noting the hours claimed by the defendants were excessive.

The defendants' counsel notified the court that paragraph 6 of the Reasons for Decision released on October 24, 2025 incorrectly stated that two costs orders made against the plaintiff remained unpaid.

The court issued an erratum replacing paragraph 6 with corrected language detailing two costs orders totalling $12,200 against the plaintiff arising from an unsuccessful appeal and a successful defence motion for leave to amend.

A self-represented plaintiff sought to set aside a settlement agreement dated March 14, 2024, whereby the defendants agreed to pay $100,000 to settle her wrongful dismissal and tort claims.

The plaintiff argued the settlement should be rescinded on grounds of lack of legal counsel, coercion, fraud and misrepresentation, breach by the defendants, and discretionary grounds.

The court found the settlement was valid and binding, that the plaintiff had adequate opportunity to seek legal advice, that no duress or illegitimate pressure was exerted, that alleged misrepresentations were not material or relied upon, and that any alleged breaches were de minimis.

The court also found the plaintiff's motion was brought with unreasonable delay.

The motion was dismissed.