The applicant moved for summary judgment under Rule 16 of the Family Law Rules to enforce a handwritten settlement agreement signed by the parties.
The respondent opposed the motion and sought to set aside the agreement under s. 56(4) of the Family Law Act, arguing that his severe medical conditions and medications impaired his capacity to understand the agreement.
The court dismissed the applicant's motion for summary judgment, finding that a genuine issue requiring a trial existed.
The court held that the expanded fact-finding powers available under Rule 20 of the Rules of Civil Procedure do not apply to Rule 16 of the Family Law Rules, and even if they did, the conflicting evidence regarding the respondent's capacity required a full trial to achieve a full appreciation of the issues.
