Consent (Review): Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 13: | Line 13: | ||
<ref name="Joshi"><i>Joshi v. Joshi,</i> 2014 ONSC 4677 (CanLII), <https://canlii.ca/t/g90d6>, retrieved on 2022-08-26</ref> | <ref name="Joshi"><i>Joshi v. Joshi,</i> 2014 ONSC 4677 (CanLII), <https://canlii.ca/t/g90d6>, retrieved on 2022-08-26</ref> | ||
< | <ref name="Rosen"><i>Rosen v. Rosen,</i> 1994 CanLII 2769 (ON CA), <https://canlii.ca/t/6k1d>, retrieved on 2022-08-26</ref> | ||
Revision as of 00:23, 27 August 2022
Joshi v. Joshi, 2014 ONSC 4677 (CanLII)[1]
[3] It is the moving party's position that the responding parties have failed to comply with the order as regards disclosure and thereby, in essence, frustrated the order, that the consent order must be read in light of the previous order of Croll J. in the family law action, which has not been complied with as regards disclosure and that material circumstances have changed, justifying the varying or setting aside of the order.
(...)
[6] Based on the jurisprudence, in order to set aside a consent order, there must be proven grounds of common mistake, misrepresentation, fraud, or any other ground which would invalidate contract or, alternatively, a material change in circumstance occurring after the consent order : Gibson v Gibson [2002] O.J. No. 174 paras. 15-16; Masters v MIS International Inc., [2000] O.J. No. 3524 and see Rosen v Rosen1994 CanLII 2769 (ON CA), [1994] O. J. No. 1160 (O.C.A.).[2]
References
- ↑ 1.0 1.1 Joshi v. Joshi, 2014 ONSC 4677 (CanLII), <https://canlii.ca/t/g90d6>, retrieved on 2022-08-26
- ↑ 2.0 2.1 Rosen v. Rosen, 1994 CanLII 2769 (ON CA), <https://canlii.ca/t/6k1d>, retrieved on 2022-08-26
