Case information

Family law — Support — Settlement agreement — What is required to show that a settlement agreement exists — In the absence of a signed and formalized agreement, when should Canadian courts recognize and enforce terms discussed during a mediation — What is the evidentiary threshold to prove that an unsigned settlement agreement is enforceable — How should Canadian courts apply the principles of contract and Hryniak v. Mauldin, 2014 SCC 7, [2014] 1 S.R. 87, in the context of Rule 16 of the Family Law Rules, O Reg. 114/99 — At what point does the strategic imperative to “lead trump” in a summary judgment proceeding become an impermissible requirement to waive solicitor-client privilege.

Case summaries are prepared by the Office of the Registrar of the Supreme Court of Canada (Law Branch). Please note that summaries are not provided to the Judges of the Court. They are placed on the Court file and website for information purposes only.

The applicant brought an unsuccessful motion for summary judgment to enforce a previous separation agreement, following which the parties proceeded to mediation. No minutes, memoranda of agreement, or written confirmation of the terms of the mediation were kept, and the applicant later denied that they had reached a settlement agreement. On the respondent’s motion for summary judgment, a judge of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice reviewed the record, including evidence from the mediator and other witnesses, and concluded that a settlement agreement had been reached. On appeal, the Ontario Court of Appeal found no palpable and overriding error that would justify overturning the determination that there was an enforceable settlement agreement.