MAHAMAD v MATTHEWS

One of the Defendants applied for disclosure of the contents of a Settlement Agreement made between the Plaintiff and another Defendant. In determining whether or not the Settlement Agreement was relevant and material the Court applied Rule 5.2(1). Veit J. stated that the Rule was much narrower than its predecessor and that it excluded tertiary evidence. Further, the Court stated that the materiality or weight of evidence must be addressed with a view to determining whether the record will significantly help to determine one of the issues raised in the Pleadings. The Court held that the existence of a Settlement Agreement was relevant and material, but that the content of the Agreement was not material.