[54] In this case, neither the original materials filed nor the subsequent affidavit of Mr. Zarek sworn September 26, 2017, provides little information concerning the circumstances in which the new retainer agreement dated May 1, 2016 was executed apart from Mr Zarek’s responding affidavit sworn October24, 2017(para.17) stating that it was fair. I have serious concerns that the fee agreement, that the solicitor in his materials relied on, was signed on behalf of an incapable party on the eve of settlement, approximately 15 years into the solicitor and client relationship. I also note as outlined at paragraph [44] above that in the updated affidavit sworn September 26, 2017, Mr. Zarek suggests yet another amount for fees. However, the point remains that there is no explanation or information provided relating to the new fee agreement. In Batalla v St. Michael’s Hospital 2016 ONSC 1513 (CanLII) at para. 52, Justice Wilson stated that the fairness inquiry involves whether on the motion to approve the settlement, the evidence establishes that the required level of factual, procedural and legal disclosure was made at the time the agreement was signed. I am not satisfied that these requirements were met.
-
FAIR – supporting auto accident victims through advocacy and education
-
FAIR – supporting auto accident victims through advocacy and education
-
FAIR – supporting auto accident victims through advocacy and education