Canada: Benefits Of "Pierringer Agreements" Diluted By Ontario Superior Court Of Justice

Last Updated: January 28 2013
Article by Don McGarvey, Q.C.

One of the best tools in my litigator's toolbox is a Pierringer Agreement. A Pierringer Agreement, sometimes called a "Proportionate Share Settlement Agreement", is often used in multi-party litigation when one or more Defendants (the "Settling Defendants") resolve their dispute with the Plaintiff or Plaintiffs.

A Pierringer Agreement allows the Settling Defendants to be released from the lawsuit leaving the remaining Defendants (the "Non-Settling Defendants") to continue to defend the Plaintiff's claim. Based on the terms of the Pierringer Agreement, the Non-Settling Defendants are precluded from issuing cross claims against the Settling Defendants. Further, the Pierringer Agreement stipulates that the Plaintiff must amend its Statement of Claim to only seek recovery for the Non-Settling Defendants' "several liability" as opposed to the more encompassing joint and several liability that the Non-Settling Defendants would typically be liable for.

Courts have consistently held that they are willing to favour the benefits of settlement (not only to the parties but on the judicial system and the administration of justice generally) through a Pierringer Agreement over the disadvantage or sometimes even the prejudice suffered by the remaining, Non- Settling Defendants. Courts have often approved Pierringer Agreements and the withdrawal of the Settling Defendants from the action prior to document discovery and oral discovery notwithstanding that to do so would seemingly put the Non-Settling Defendants at a disadvantage.

The benefits of a Pierringer Agreement suffered a recent blow by the Ontario Superior Court of Justice in CCAA (Companies Creditor Arrangement Act, R.S.C. 1985 c. C-36, as amended) proceedings related to the proposed plan of compromise or arrangement with respect to Hollinger Inc., 4322525 Canada Inc. and Sugra Limited.

In the Hollinger case, the Court was faced with an approval of a settlement entered into between the Applicants (collectively "Hollinger Inc.") and his former auditors, KPMG and lawyers, Torys LLP.

Approval of the settlement was objected to by the Non-Settling Defendants, being (former Lord) Conrad Black and several of his close associates. At least in North America, the past several years have seen Conrad Black very much in the news in relation to both civil and criminal proceedings brought against him. Hollinger Inc., which up until 2007, was the parent company of Hollinger International Inc., brought lawsuits against several individuals and entities.

Its settlement with its former auditors and lawyers was objected to by Black and his former associates (collectively the "Non-Settling Defendants") largely on the basis that the release of KPMG and Torys LLP would, if approved, deprive the Non-Settling Defendants of substantial rights they would have for documentary production and oral discovery that the Non-Settling Defendants would have as of right if the settlement did not occur or was not approved.

The Third Party Releases and Bar Orders contained within the Pierringer Agreement between Hollinger Inc. and the Settling Defendants, contained an express limitation on Hollinger Inc.'s right of recovery from a Non-Settling Defendant. Hollinger Inc. agreed to seek no more from the Non- Settling Defendants than the Non-Settling Defendants' "several liability" as opposed to any joint and several liability the Non-Settling Defendants would otherwise have. Seeking to pursue only the Non- Settling Defendants' several liability is a fundamental feature of a Pierringer Agreement.

As the litigation trustee of Hollinger Inc. indicated:

It is Hollinger's intention to make the settlements by Torys and KPMG an economically neutral event for the Non-Settling Defendants ...

Hollinger Inc. is prepared to waive its right to joint and several liability in respect of the liability between either Torys, KPMG or other Settling Defendant on the one hand and a Non-Settling Defendant on the other. Hollinger Inc. proposed that the settlement approval orders provide that if any Non-Settling Defendant would otherwise be able to establish a right of contribution and indemnity from Torys, KPMG or other Settling Defendant, then the damage owing to Hollinger Inc. jointly and severally by any such non-Defendant will be reduced by the degree in which Torys and/or KPMG or other Settling Defendants are found to be at fault or negligent.

Therefore, while each Non-Settling Defendant will not have a claim for contribution and indemnity against KPMG, Torys or other Settling Defendant for the amount which any of them might be found to be at fault or negligent, there would be no economic detriment because any such amount will not be sought from the Non-Settling Defendant if that Defendant could have otherwise asserted a claim.

Nothing in the settlement approval orders will prevent any Non-Settling Defendant from requiring the Court to determine degree in which any of KPMG, Torys or other Settling Defendant is at fault or negligent with respect to any damages suffered by Hollinger. To the extent the Court finds KPMG, Torys or other Settling Defendant responsible for a proportionate share of those damages and the Non-Settling Defendant has a right of contribution or indemnity against either of them, then Hollinger Inc. will have no claim against any person in respect of the proportionate share.

If the decision would have stopped there, it would have been consistent with the majority of cases that have come before it. However, it did not.

The Court went on to find that while Pierringer Agreements have been increasingly utilized in Canada in a variety of litigation settings, including class actions, there was no question that settlement with some Defendants as opposed to all Defendants interferes with what might otherwise be the procedural rights of the remaining Defendants.

While the Court did recognize that any detriment should be balanced against the benefit to the Settling Defendants and to the Plaintiffs, as well as to the administration of justice as a whole on a case by case basis, in this case, it took the unusual step of approving the settlement on certain conditions allowing for discovery of the Settling Defendants.

Notwithstanding the fact that the Settling Defendants would typically be extracted from the litigation with no other obligation to the Plaintiff or the Court, the Court in this case grappled with the following issue:

The question then is does the Court simply say party discovery rights trump so that Settling Parties are subject to all of the obligations and costs they would have as if they were to remain Defendants OR does the Court say the process can be controlled through effective management particularly on the Commercial List. To say the former is to reject approval of an essential term of the settlements.

In determining the question, the Court parenthetically noted that:

If one were to go back 40 years, the parties to litigation and their counsel were largely responsible for managing production and discovery. In that bygone age there were often only 5 to 10 documents per production and less than half a day of oral discovery.

Parenthetically, most judges and many counsel report that at trial today there are rarely more than 5 to 10 documents that are truly determinative. However, in the last decade the world of document discovery has changed significantly.

Typically there are thousands if not hundreds of thousands and sometimes millions of documents that have become part of the discovery process.

This has given rise to the need for the Court to participate in the process. In Ontario, it commenced with case management which has achieved significant success in Ottawa and Windsor but less so in Toronto.

The Court held that both Settling Defendants would continue to have a role in the litigation. In particular, the Court approved the settlement but on conditions that:

1. At a minimum, each of Torys and KPMG agree to be bound by the respective procedural protocols which would form part of the appendices to the Orders;

2. That a term in each Order provided that each of Torys and KPMG recognize and accept that they will have ongoing obligations in the litigation as non-parties, subject to management by the Court.

Attached to the Court's decision is a document entitled Non-Party Document Production Protocol outlining the obligations of the Settling Defendants KPMG and Torys LLP in the context of the action. The expense to which these Settling Parties are necessarily put by the obligations on them as non-parties for document production and discovery may well give other Defendants in multi-party litigation pause before they consider settling (and presumably being extricated from) litigation if they are going to continue to be effectively subject to expensive document and oral discovery processes and the Court's order and direction.

When one resolves a case and believes that they are extricated from it, it is my view that a Court should do everything to uphold that. While there may be some procedural rights that are lost by the Non-Settling Defendants, they are just that, procedural rights. They do not appear to be substantive.

Of course, it is open for any party as a Defendant to engage in settlement discussions with a Plaintiff and hopefully extricate themselves (without the obligations of document and oral discovery, one would hope), at any time. The prudence of entering into these discussions and achieving a resolution of the case on terms typically found in a Pierringer Agreement should be a triumph and should be upheld by the Court. The fact that the settlement would be "economically neutral" to the Non-Settling Defendants by virtue of the fact that they are only liable for their several liability is enough to level the playing field again. The Settling Defendants should not then effectively be brought back in the action after they have settled nor should they be required to continue to be involved with expensive and extensive document and oral discovery under the Court's direction.

Unfortunately, the benefits of a Pierringer Agreement, at least in Ontario, have been dulled somewhat by the case of Hollinger Inc. Hopefully this is an anomalous decision and one that won't be followed by other jurisdictions. Certainly, other jurisdictions such as Alberta have been loath to take this step except in very extraordinary circumstances.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Don McGarvey, Q.C.
Events from this Firm
27 Oct 2016, Seminar, Edmonton, Canada

Alberta is going through a difficult economic period. These times can be challenging and while owners struggle to get their business through the rough patch, they want to preserve the assets and capital they have built up.

2 Nov 2016, Webinar, Calgary, Canada

“Problem Employees” come in a variety of forms but seem to take up the majority of an employer’s time. Each form brings its own challenges and each must be addressed in a different way.

30 Nov 2016, Webinar, Calgary, Canada

Legal issues surrounding contaminated sites affects landowners, developers, realtors, as well as consultants and contractors working on the front lines. This webinar will provide a practical review of how the legislation is actually being used, recent court decisions, challenges with brownfield developments, and future changes.

In association with
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
Email Address
Company Name
Confirm Password
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Media & IT
 Real Estate
 Wealth Mgt
Asia Pacific
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
United States
Worldwide Updates
Check to state you have read and
agree to our Terms and Conditions

Terms & Conditions and Privacy Statement (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd and as a user you are granted a non-exclusive, revocable license to access the Website under its terms and conditions of use. Your use of the Website constitutes your agreement to the following terms and conditions of use. Mondaq Ltd may terminate your use of the Website if you are in breach of these terms and conditions or if Mondaq Ltd decides to terminate your license of use for whatever reason.

Use of

You may use the Website but are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the content and articles available (the Content). You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these terms & conditions or with the prior written consent of Mondaq Ltd. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information about’s content, users or contributors in order to offer them any services or products which compete directly or indirectly with Mondaq Ltd’s services and products.


Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the documents and related graphics published on this server for any purpose. All such documents and related graphics are provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers hereby disclaim all warranties and conditions with regard to this information, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. In no event shall Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use or performance of information available from this server.

The documents and related graphics published on this server could include technical inaccuracies or typographical errors. Changes are periodically added to the information herein. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers may make improvements and/or changes in the product(s) and/or the program(s) described herein at any time.


Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including what sort of information you are interested in, for three primary purposes:

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, newsletter alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our information providers who provide information free for your use.

Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) do not sell or provide your details to third parties other than information providers. The reason we provide our information providers with this information is so that they can measure the response their articles are receiving and provide you with information about their products and services.

If you do not want us to provide your name and email address you may opt out by clicking here .

If you do not wish to receive any future announcements of products and services offered by Mondaq by clicking here .

Information Collection and Use

We require site users to register with Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to view the free information on the site. We also collect information from our users at several different points on the websites: this is so that we can customise the sites according to individual usage, provide 'session-aware' functionality, and ensure that content is acquired and developed appropriately. This gives us an overall picture of our user profiles, which in turn shows to our Editorial Contributors the type of person they are reaching by posting articles on Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) – meaning more free content for registered users.

We are only able to provide the material on the Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) site free to site visitors because we can pass on information about the pages that users are viewing and the personal information users provide to us (e.g. email addresses) to reputable contributing firms such as law firms who author those pages. We do not sell or rent information to anyone else other than the authors of those pages, who may change from time to time. Should you wish us not to disclose your details to any of these parties, please tick the box above or tick the box marked "Opt out of Registration Information Disclosure" on the Your Profile page. We and our author organisations may only contact you via email or other means if you allow us to do so. Users can opt out of contact when they register on the site, or send an email to with “no disclosure” in the subject heading

Mondaq News Alerts

In order to receive Mondaq News Alerts, users have to complete a separate registration form. This is a personalised service where users choose regions and topics of interest and we send it only to those users who have requested it. Users can stop receiving these Alerts by going to the Mondaq News Alerts page and deselecting all interest areas. In the same way users can amend their personal preferences to add or remove subject areas.


A cookie is a small text file written to a user’s hard drive that contains an identifying user number. The cookies do not contain any personal information about users. We use the cookie so users do not have to log in every time they use the service and the cookie will automatically expire if you do not visit the Mondaq website (or its affiliate sites) for 12 months. We also use the cookie to personalise a user's experience of the site (for example to show information specific to a user's region). As the Mondaq sites are fully personalised and cookies are essential to its core technology the site will function unpredictably with browsers that do not support cookies - or where cookies are disabled (in these circumstances we advise you to attempt to locate the information you require elsewhere on the web). However if you are concerned about the presence of a Mondaq cookie on your machine you can also choose to expire the cookie immediately (remove it) by selecting the 'Log Off' menu option as the last thing you do when you use the site.

Some of our business partners may use cookies on our site (for example, advertisers). However, we have no access to or control over these cookies and we are not aware of any at present that do so.

Log Files

We use IP addresses to analyse trends, administer the site, track movement, and gather broad demographic information for aggregate use. IP addresses are not linked to personally identifiable information.


This web site contains links to other sites. Please be aware that Mondaq (or its affiliate sites) are not responsible for the privacy practices of such other sites. We encourage our users to be aware when they leave our site and to read the privacy statements of these third party sites. This privacy statement applies solely to information collected by this Web site.

Surveys & Contests

From time-to-time our site requests information from users via surveys or contests. Participation in these surveys or contests is completely voluntary and the user therefore has a choice whether or not to disclose any information requested. Information requested may include contact information (such as name and delivery address), and demographic information (such as postcode, age level). Contact information will be used to notify the winners and award prizes. Survey information will be used for purposes of monitoring or improving the functionality of the site.


If a user elects to use our referral service for informing a friend about our site, we ask them for the friend’s name and email address. Mondaq stores this information and may contact the friend to invite them to register with Mondaq, but they will not be contacted more than once. The friend may contact Mondaq to request the removal of this information from our database.


This website takes every reasonable precaution to protect our users’ information. When users submit sensitive information via the website, your information is protected using firewalls and other security technology. If you have any questions about the security at our website, you can send an email to

Correcting/Updating Personal Information

If a user’s personally identifiable information changes (such as postcode), or if a user no longer desires our service, we will endeavour to provide a way to correct, update or remove that user’s personal data provided to us. This can usually be done at the “Your Profile” page or by sending an email to

Notification of Changes

If we decide to change our Terms & Conditions or Privacy Policy, we will post those changes on our site so our users are always aware of what information we collect, how we use it, and under what circumstances, if any, we disclose it. If at any point we decide to use personally identifiable information in a manner different from that stated at the time it was collected, we will notify users by way of an email. Users will have a choice as to whether or not we use their information in this different manner. We will use information in accordance with the privacy policy under which the information was collected.

How to contact Mondaq

You can contact us with comments or queries at

If for some reason you believe Mondaq Ltd. has not adhered to these principles, please notify us by e-mail at and we will use commercially reasonable efforts to determine and correct the problem promptly.