Skip to main content

Fridays With Rogers Partners

It was great to see two of our new articling students present cases at our muffin meeting this morning. They did a fantastic job!

Ankita Abraham discussed the Court of Appeal’s decision in Hengeveld v. The Personal Insurance Company, 2019 ONCA 497. The defendant insurer commenced a third party claim against the plaintiffs’ lawyers for failing to take adequate steps to preserve a vehicle.

The Court of Appeal upheld a dismissal of the third party claim. Based on the principles of agency, any negligence of the plaintiffs’ lawyers would be attributed to the plaintiffs.

Micah Pirk O’Connell addressed the case of Kearns v. Canadian Tire Corporation, Limited, 2019 ONSC 4235. A wrongful dismissal lawsuit settled at a mediation. The defendant’s representatives and its counsel who attended the mediation did not realize that the plaintiff had already been paid a substantial sum.

Both parties brought motions to enforce the settlement, albeit on different terms. At a cross-examination, the plaintiff refused to answer a number of questions.

On a refusals motion, Master Jolley held that the plaintiff was not required to answer questions related to an offer to settle that was made prior to the litigation. This information was protected by settlement privilege.

Further, Master Jolley held that the plaintiff was not required to answer questions regarding what he discussed with his lawyer concerning settlement. This information was not relevant to the underlying motion and was protected by lawyer-client privilege.

Lastly, Master Jolley denied a request by the defendant for the plaintiff’s lawyer to be examined in aid of its motion.