Any disputes on non-essential terms did not negate the existence of a binding agreement: court
The BC Supreme Court enforced a settlement agreement in a dispute over the administration of an estate involving two brothers' estates.
The deceased, who passed away intestate, left behind two sons, one of whom held the power of attorney and acted as the estate's administrator. The other son, who survived her by just under two months, left a widow acting as the administrator of his estate. She initiated legal action against the brother, alleging various misfeasance in the administration of the mother's estate, which were purported to have prejudiced her husband's estate and their son, who is on the autism spectrum.
Settlement negotiations between the parties commenced after discovery examinations. The initial offer included a payment of $200,000 in trust for the son, to be secured by a mortgage. A series of counteroffers followed, involving adjustments in the settlement amount and payment terms. The final offer stipulated a $300,000 payment from the sale proceeds of the brother’s home, to be secured by a second mortgage, and included mutual releases of all claims.
The brother's counsel agreed to most terms but raised concerns about the second mortgage conflicting with the first mortgage, suggesting an alternative security method. The plaintiff’s counsel confirmed acceptance of the original terms, including the second mortgage.
The Supreme Court evaluated whether a binding settlement agreement had been reached. Referring to precedents, the court determined that the parties had agreed on all essential terms. The primary term was the payment of $300,000, and any disputes regarding non-essential terms like the mortgage details did not negate the existence of a binding agreement. The court emphasized a practical approach consistent with Supreme Court Civil Rule 1-3, aiming for a just, speedy, and inexpensive determination of proceedings.
The court declared the settlement agreement binding and ordered the brother to pay $300,000 to the widow or list his property for sale to secure the payment. The agreement stipulated that the brother would pay $1,000 monthly as interest and required him to grant a second mortgage to secure the settlement amount. The parties were also ordered to execute a mutual release of claims.
