Is it appropriate to go behind the terms of a settlement?

Zisman J. at paragraph 22 of her decision in Gzechowski v. Percy, states: It is not appropriate to go behind the freely negotiated terms of settlement and engage in an exercise of determining which party’s position on each issue would have been accepted by the trial judge if the matter had proceeded to trial and that the reasonableness of the conduct of the parties is a consideration but not the most important one.

George J. at paragraph 12 of his decision in Krueger v. Krueger, states: In this case, is there a successful party? This is distinct from whether either or both parties achieved some success. Determining a winner is difficult if not impossible when a matter resolves for various reasons. Unlike a trial which necessarily generates a decision favouring one party or the other, the terms have been agreed upon. This means, instead of identifying a reason not to award costs, which I am to do when there is a successful party, I must identify a compelling reason to make an award.