As set out in Hunt v. T & N plc (1990), 1990 CanLII 90 (SCC), 49 B.C.L.R. (2d) 273 at 289 (S.C.C.), a defence should be struck pursuant to Rule 19(24) where it is “plain and obvious” that there is not a valid defence. While the law in B.C. is not entirely clear regarding whether a settlement which is not the subject of a court order can be challenged on the basis of “unreasonableness,” it is not plain and obvious that it cannot. Accordingly, I will not strike portions of the defence on the basis that there is no defence of unreasonableness.
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.