Court File and Parties
SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE - ONTARIO
RE: Borden Ladner Gervais LLP
AND:
Patricia Sinclair
BEFORE: Justice Chalmers
COUNSEL: G. Kramer for the Plaintiff
M. Klaiman for the Defendant
HEARD: In writing
ENDORSEMENT
[1]
Overview
The Defendant seeks an order to vary or amend the Amended Judgment of Justice Morgan granted December 10, 2013, to reflect the fact that the parties have agreed to settle the matters in dispute with a lump sum payment to the Plaintiff in exchange for the Plaintiff relinquishing any interest in the properties listed in the Amended Judgment. The parties consent to the amendment of the Amended Judgment.
[2]
Analysis
The Motion is brought pursuant to R. 59.06(2)(a) or in the alternative R. 59.06(2)(b) or (d), and on the inherent jurisdiction of this Court.
3Rule 59.06(2)(a) allows the court to set aside or vary an order on the ground of fraud or of facts arising or discovered after it was made. Here, there is no suggestion the variation of the order was on the basis of fraud. Rule 59.06(2)(b) applies if the party seeks to suspend the operation of an order. R. 59.06(2)(d) applies where a party seeks to obtain other relief than that originally awarded.
4Here, the parties seek a variation of the Amended Judgment of Justice Morgan to reflect the fact that the parties have agreed to an alternative remedy to that provided in the Amended Judgment. The Defendant is willing to accept a lump sum in satisfaction of the Amended Judgment and is therefore willing to relinquish its interest or power over the properties listed in the Amended Judgment. I am satisfied that the amendment is sought because the parties seek other relief than that originally awarded. This relief may be ordered pursuant to R. 59.06(2)(d).
[5]
Disposition
I grant the relief sought. The order will go in accordance with the draft consent order filed and signed by me.
Date: August 12, 2022