What constitutes an admission under the severance clause?

In terms of what constitutes an admission, the parties agree that there must be a deliberate and unambiguous concession to the opposing party (see Hughs v. TD Bank [2002] OJ No. 2145). In this case, it is important to note that Drash refers directly to the legal advice he received and relied on twice in the current version of his Reply. In paragraph 7, he states that he received legal advice and was advised that the clause did not revoke his common law rights as it was ambiguous. In paragraph 10, Drash states that it was not his obligation to educate Mircom as to the shortcomings that his counsel had identified. In paragraph 11, he notes that it was because of his consultation with legal counsel rather than in spite of it, he wholly relief upon his counsel’s interpretation of the severance clause.