Call us: (905) 366 9700

Legal Blog

Release

Posted on March 12, 2018 | Posted in Civil Litigation, Five Liners

Brager v. Ontario (Minister of Natural Resources) 2017 Ont SCJ

The parties entered into an agreement regarding a dispute over title to land. They entered into minutes of settlement that resulted in the plaintiff agreeing to provide a release. The defendant’s release could have handed the usual “no claims over” clause (i.e. no claims against 3rd parties who might claim over against the defendant), but instead merely indicated that, if such a claim was made, the plaintiff had to indemnify the defendant for all damages incurred as a result of that claim. ┬áThe plaintiff then mentioned, for the first time, that it had commenced an action against the surveyor and wanted to exclude that action from the no claims over clause. The judge held that there was a settlement and that the plaintiff had to execute the defendant’s form of release without amendment. The judge held that the no claims over clause was standard in virtually every release entered into by parties engaged in litigation and, without such a clause, the release would not be a full and final release.

 

Jonathan Speigel

 

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

 

Share:

Download our free checklist:

“10 Questions to ask before hiring a law firm”

DOWNLOAD

Speigel Nichols Fox LLP