10. & TOPIC 2: Mediations, Formal offers to settle, Types of settlement agreements Readings 2: SCCRs Part 12, Part 11, 7-7 Sable Offshore Energy v Ameron International Corp Union Carbide v Bombardier RULE 9-1 p.33 – Offers to Settle (1) Mary Carter Agreements scenario. A partial settlement to litigation some Defendant(s) settle with P by accepting a term of which, guarantees P a certain monetary requirement so the D’s liability is capped; and any money to be repaid recovered from the remaining defendant(s) Regardless of the settlement, that D remains a party in the lawsuit and pursue the co-defendants along with the P to a lawsuit they’ve already settled Extremely rare in Canada; more frequent in the US (and this arrangement is secret in US) It’s in the settling D’s interest to increase the liability of the non-settling D as it reduces own liability Example Scenario: 6 million case D agrees to P ½ of that (so 3 mill) BUT for dollar P win at trial, it is agreed that D get half of that amount At the end, P actually wins 8 mil D actually gets 1 mil back half of 2 mil – (2) Pierringer (BC Ferries) Agreements See Offshore Energy case below Multi-defendant scenario, but P will settle issue with defendant(s), but not all. It is a partial settlement (contract), where D will pay an amt of money and P expressly waives any right to recover from that settling defendant(s). Then P amends the pleadings where P expressly severs liability b/w settling and non-settling defendants W/o amending the pleadings, and only removing from D from style of cause without amending the factual allegations; then defendant B, C, D can third party drag defendant A back into the action The key part of this is that pierringer agreements allow defendant(s) to be liable for only the smaller portion that they are liable for by severing liability between multi-party defendants; so that they are not held jointly liable.
10. & TOPIC 2: Mediations, Formal offers to settle, Types of settlement agreements Readings 2: SCCRs Part 12, Part 11, 7-7 Sable Offshore Energy v Ameron International Corp Union Carbide v Bombardier RULE 9-1 – p.33 Offers to Settle (1) Mary Carter Agreements scenario. A partial settlement to litigation some Defendant(s) settle with P by accepting a term of which, guarantees P a certain monetary requirement so the D’s liability is capped; and any money to be repaid recovered from the remaining defendant(s) Regardless of the settlement, that D remains a party in the lawsuit and pursue the co-defendants along with the P to a lawsuit they’ve already settled Extremely rare in Canada; more frequent in the US (and this arrangement is secret in US) It’s in the settling D’s interest to increase the liability of the non-settling D as it reduces own liability Example Scenario: 6 million case D agrees to P ½ of that (so 3 mill) BUT for dollar P win at trial, it is agreed that D get half of that amount At the end, P actually wins 8 mil D actually gets 1 mil back – half of 2 mil (2) Pierringer (BC Ferries) Agreements See Offshore Energy case below Multi-defendant scenario, but P will settle issue with defendant(s), but not all. It is a partial settlement (contract), where D will pay an amt of money and P expressly waives any right to recover from that settling defendant(s). Then P amends the pleadings where P expressly severs liability b/w settling and non-settling defendants W/o amending the pleadings, and only removing from D from style of cause without amending the factual allegations; then defendant B, C, D can third party drag defendant A back into the action The key part of this is that pierringer agreements allow defendant(s) to be liable for only the smaller portion that they are liable for by severing liability between multi-party defendants; so that they are not held jointly liable.
Civ-Pro-CAN-Grace-K.docx