It's coming up a lot, so here's the answer to 'Nothing in the SCC judgement spoke to damages. The decision to hand Khadr money was political, not legal'

There were a number of related but different Omar Khadr cases.  The one claiming damages was filed in 2004, but still hadn't gotten very far.  The main issue in that case was: did the Canadian government violate Khadr's Charter rights?  If they did, compensation would follow.

One of the other cases - asking for repatriation - got a final SCC decision in 2010, and actually answered that key question from the damages case - yes, the Canadian government did violated Khadr Charter rights, contributing to his detention in Guantanamo.

With that, liability in the damages case became a foregone conclusion.

Major parties (corporations, governments, Trump) almost always look to settle to cut their losses.  It's rational. That's what happened here, and for an amount in the same ballpark as the Mahar Arar settlement by the Harper government.