Log in or register
Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 18 OCTOBER 2022

ONCA: "Immediate" Obligation To Disclose Settlement Agreements "Means Exactly What It Says"

Crawley MacKewn Brush LLP
Explore more from Crawley MacKewn Brush LLP

In its recent decision in Hamilton-Wentworth District School Board v. Zizek, the ONCA reiterated that parties who enter into a settlement agreement which alters the litigation landscape have an obligation to immediately disclose the agreement.

CanadaLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration
Dana Carson
Dana Carson
Linda Mochon Senado
Linda Mochon Senado
Author LinkedIn connections

In its recent decision in Hamilton-Wentworth District School Board v. Zizek1, the Court of Appeal for Ontario (the "ONCA") reiterated that parties who enter into a settlement agreement which alters the litigation landscape have an obligation to immediately disclose the agreement. Applying the principles set out in its 2010 decision Aecon Buildings v. Stephenson Engineering Limited2, the ONCA confirmed that the obligation to disclose such settlements is not a matter of discretion, context, or factual analysis. The decision enforces the clear "bright line" principle of immediate disclosure, barring which consequences of the "most serious nature" for the defaulting party must result – a stay of the action.

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

Register for freeORLog in

View source

Related Articles

Legal Intelligence Newsletters: sign up for the latest legal and regulatory news on your chosen topics

Read more about

Related Comparative Guides

See more popular content from

Article

BLG At The SCC – What’s Coming In The Supreme Court’s Fall 2026 Sitting Schedule

The Supreme Court of Canada held its second annual ceremony marking the opening of the judicial year at its temporary home in the West Memorial Building, with Chief Justice highlighting the Court's increased caseload and architectural features. What significant constitutional and legal challenges will the Court address in its fall 2026 session, including cases on firearm regulations, Crown immunity, and vicarious liability?
CanadaLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration
Borden Ladner Gervais LLP
Borden Ladner Gervais LLP
Article

Ontario Court Bifurcates Class Action As Practical Approach To Onerous Discovery Demands

An Ontario court granted a motion to bifurcate liability and damages stages in a class action alleging $500 million in hidden fees, finding that extensive documentary production requests were disproportionate and not relevant to determining liability. The decision addresses proportionality concerns in class actions where defendants face onerous discovery demands spanning millions of transactions over a decade.
CanadaLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration
Bennett Jones LLP
Bennett Jones LLP
Article

The Supreme Court Of Canada Reviews Québec’s Bill 21

Québec's Bill 21, enacted in 2019, bans public sector workers from wearing religious symbols and is shielded from most Charter challenges by the notwithstanding clause. The Supreme Court of Canada is now reviewing this controversial law, with a ruling expected as early as November 2026 or later in 2027. Former Minister of Justice Arif Virani discusses the court's struggle to balance competing constitutional principles in this landmark case.
CanadaLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration
Torys
Torys
Article

The Coldcard Exploit: Why Victims May Have Two Routes To Recovery

A five-year-old firmware defect in Coldcard hardware wallets has enabled attackers to systematically drain an estimated $116 million in Bitcoin from over 5,200 victims since July 2026. This unprecedented exploit raises critical questions about manufacturer liability and creates two distinct legal pathways for recovery: blockchain tracing against the perpetrators and potential litigation against Canadian manufacturer Coinkite for product defects that undermined the fundamental security promise of devices mar
CanadaLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration
WeirFoulds LLP
WeirFoulds LLP
Article

Supreme Court Strikes Down Privative Clause: What Democracy Watch v Canada Means For Administrative Decision-makers

The Supreme Court of Canada has unanimously struck down a privative clause in the Conflict of Interest Act that attempted to bar judicial review of the Ethics Commissioner's decisions. The ruling establishes that the Constitution guarantees a minimum of legality review over all administrative decisions, with implications extending to labour relations, workers' compensation, and immigration legislation containing similar clauses.
CanadaLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration
Miller Thomson
Miller Thomson
Article

Seeking Leave To Appeal A Decision Of The Divisional Court: An Updated Framework

A five-judge panel of the Ontario Court of Appeal has refined the framework for granting leave to appeal decisions of the Divisional Court, addressing decades of inconsistent interpretation and application. The updated test clarifies when an arguable question of law or mixed law and fact rises to sufficient public importance to warrant appellate consideration, resolving uncertainty about whether different standards apply based on the Divisional Court's jurisdiction.
CanadaLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration
Crawley MacKewn Brush LLP
Crawley MacKewn Brush LLP
Article

Terminate With Caution: Regulatory Findings May Not Establish Cause

The Ontario Superior Court's decision in Silva v Royal Bank of Canada examines whether regulatory compliance concerns and policy violations automatically justify dismissal for cause. When RBC terminated a long-serving financial planner following an investigation into client transactions and compliance practices, the Court scrutinized not only the alleged misconduct but also the fairness of the investigation and the substantial impact of regulatory reporting on the employee's future career prospects.
CanadaEmployment and HR
Crawley MacKewn Brush LLP
Crawley MacKewn Brush LLP
Article

Lessons In Suing Securities Regulators: Herner v. Mutual Fund Dealers Association And Ontario Securities Commission, 2026 ONSC 4889

A mutual fund dealing representative sued the MFDA and OSC for $47.5 million in damages, alleging intentional torts including conspiracy, abuse of process, and malicious prosecution stemming from a regulatory investigation and enforcement proceedings. The 21-day trial resulted in complete dismissal of all claims, with the court making significant findings on regulatory immunity provisions and the scope of duties owed by securities regulators to regulated persons.
CanadaLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration
Crawley MacKewn Brush LLP
Crawley MacKewn Brush LLP