[26] Through the guise of seeking leave to serve and file a Jury Notice after the close of pleadings, I find Economical is effectively seeking to vary or avoid the consequences of the consent Judgment. While the evidence of alleged inadvertence is questionable and would, on its own, support the dismissal of Economical’s motion, I also find the presence of actual prejudice to Intact if Economical was granted leave to serve and file a Jury Notice. Intact participated in lengthy settlement negotiations which culminated in a consent Judgment. There are very limited grounds upon which a consent Judgment can be set aside. As held by Justice Allen in Davis v. Cooper 2010 ONSC 4320 (CanLII), 2010 ONSC 4320 (S.C.J.), a consent order is a contract that can only be set aside or varied by subsequent consent or upon the grounds of common mistake, misrepresentation, fraud or any other ground which could invalidate a contract.
https://www.canlii.org/en/on/onsc/doc/2016/2016onsc1746/2016onsc1746.html