An appeal concerning the failure to disclose immediately litigation agreements between a plaintiff (subrogated insurer) and a defendant that converted their adversarial relationship into a cooperative one.
The plaintiff and defendant entered into two agreements (2011 and 2016) whereby the defendant would defend the action and prosecute a third-party claim funded by the plaintiff, and subsequently the plaintiff assigned all its rights in the action to itself.
These agreements were not disclosed immediately but rather piecemeal throughout 2016.
The motion judge found the agreements should have been disclosed but refused to stay the action, finding no prejudice.
The appellate court reversed, holding that failure to immediately disclose agreements that change the litigation landscape constitutes abuse of process requiring a stay of the non-disclosing party's claim as a matter of principle.
