On August 6, 2020, the Court of Appeal for Ontario released its decision in Neilas (799 College St) Inc. v. Houston Engineering & Drafting Inc. (2020 ONCA 496), upholding the findings of the Honourable Justice Sossin that the settlement agreed on between the Appellant, Houston Thomas Engio (“Engio”), and the Respondents, Neilas (799 College St) Inc. and Skypoint Hi-Rise Ltd., was valid and enforceable, and dismissing the appeal.
Engio argued that the settlement was not valid and enforceable as a result of alterations to the minutes of settlement and concerns expressed regarding the contents of the mutual release, both of which were discussed after the settlement terms were agreed upon. The Court of Appeal found that Justice Sossin did not err in finding that the settlement was valid and enforceable on the basis that there were no material concerns about the settlement and the Respondents had agreed to include an additional clause to address Engio’s concern about the mutual release.
The Court of Appeal also dismissed Engio’s motion to adduce fresh evidence on the appeal concerning allegations by Engio against his former counsel and of alleged “contumelious” conduct, misrepresentations, and bad faith by the Respondents, finding that the proposed fresh evidence either was available on the motion date or became available subsequently and, in any event, would not have affected Justice Sossin’s conclusion.
The Respondents were represented by Chris Selby in the appeal and motion to adduce fresh evidence.
A copy of the decision can be found here.