2 total
A motion to strike pleadings for failure to immediately disclose a settlement was dismissed because the settlement did not entirely change the litigation landscape.
The decision addresses a motion by Gowing Contractors Ltd. and Zurich Insurance Company Ltd. to strike the statement of defence of Walsh Construction Company Canada and Walsh Construction Co., and to stay related actions, on the basis that Walsh failed to immediately disclose a settlement with the City of Toronto in a related action.
The court found that the settlement did not entirely change the litigation landscape of the actions involving Gowing and Zurich, and therefore the immediate disclosure doctrine did not apply.
The motion was dismissed.
The court refused to award substantial indemnity costs because the plaintiff's offer to settle lacked clarity and a genuine compromise.
Echelon Environmental Inc. sought to vary a costs disposition in its favour, requesting substantial indemnity costs after an Offer to Settle, arguing its judgment was greater than the offer.
The target defendant, Jeda Rose Management Inc., opposed this.
The court found Echelon's Offer to Settle lacked clarity regarding pre-judgment interest calculation and that the $2,000 discount from the judgment amount did not fulfill the incentive to settlement under Rule 49.10.
The court exercised its discretion under Section 131 of the Courts of Justice Act, refusing to apply Rule 49.10 and maintaining the original costs award of $22,500.00.
