Call us: (905) 366 9700

Legal Blog

Court Makes 15 Orders On Motion to Implement Pierringer Agreement

Posted on April 23, 2018 | Posted in Civil Litigation, Five Liners

Allianz v. Canada 2017 Ont SCJ

Plaintiff insurance company was suing 3 defendants relating to a plane accident. The plaintiff entered into a Pierringer agreement with 2 of the defendants and wanted to continue the action against the 3rd. In doing so, the plaintiff proposed to amend the statement of claim to make it clear that it was claiming against the 3rd defendant for only the share of damages actually caused by its negligence. As an example, if the 2 defendants were held to have been 70% responsible for the damages and the 3rd defendant 30% responsible, then the plaintiff would receive only 30% of its damages against the 3rd defendant and would receive from the other 2 defendants the amounts for which they had settled. The judge held that it had jurisdiction to deal with the matter and dismissed all of the cross claims among the 3 defendants, but wanted to ensure that, in so doing, the remaining 3rd defendant would not be prejudiced. Accordingly, he set out 15 points in his order, including orders permitting the remaining parties to use previous affidavits of documents, document production, and discovery transcripts in the litigation; allowing the 3rd defendant to bring a motion seeking production and discovery against any of the settling defendants; ensuring that the settling defendants preserved all documents listed in their affidavits of documents and any other documents subsequently produced; and requiring the settling defendants to keep the 3rd defendant informed as to the whereabouts of any witnesses who were deposed for discovery and any other employees or former employees who might be required as witnesses.


Jonathan Speigel


Written by Jonathan Speigel, the founding partner of Speigel Nichols Fox LLP, leads the litigation and construction practices.



Download our free checklist:

“10 Questions to ask before hiring a law firm”


Speigel Nichols Fox LLP