Court File and Parties

CITATION: 1603876 Ontario Ltd. v. Refac Industrial Contractors Inc., 2019 ONSC 6907

DIVISIONAL COURT FILE NO.: DC-16-00000042-0000

DATE: 20191128

SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE – ONTARIO

DIVISIONAL COURT

RE: 1603878 Ontario Limited et al., Appellant

AND:

REFAC Industrial Contractors Inc., Respondent

BEFORE: Pierce, Ducharme, and Tausenfreund JJ.

COUNSEL: Sheri-Lynn Medaglia, for the appellant

Joel Reinhardt, for the respondent

HEARD at London: November 28, 2019

Endorsement

[1] The appellant appeals from the decision of Justice Monroe who determined on motion there was no settlement agreement between the parties after hearing viva voce evidence. The appellant argues that the motion judge gave insufficient reasons. We disagree. Justice Monroe applied the correct test in law. His reasons summarize the evidence of the witnesses that underpin his conclusion that there was no meeting of the minds between the parties. He drew inferences about the evidence as he was entitled to do. While summarizing and reconciling evidence is not a perfect exercise, Justice Munroe identified the conflicting points. The burden was on the appellant to prove the parties had reached a settlement. The evidence supported there was no meeting of the minds. The appeal is dismissed. The respondent shall have its costs fixed at $10,000, inclusive.

“Justice H. Pierce”

Pierce J.

I agree “Justice T. Ducharme”

Ducharme J.

I agree “Justice W. Tausenfreund”

Tausenfreund J.

Date: November 28, 2019