On a post-trial distribution motion arising from a failed land development scheme, the court addressed competing claims between settling investors and investors who proceeded through trial and appeals.
The settling parties obtained judgment on their settlement agreements, but were denied equitable liens over preserved funds because their rights were contractual, the defendants were not shown to own the preserved funds, and equity favoured the trial parties who preserved assets and bore the burdens of the litigation.
The court also held that the trial parties lacked standing to raise limitation defences to enforcement of the settlements, and excluded a disputed email under settlement privilege.
The funds paid into court were ordered distributed pro rata among the trial parties, subject to specified limitations tied to claims against one defendant.
