However, the respondent has not cross-appealed and, for the reasons I have set out above, she is bound in any event by the agreement underlying the order. Moreover, I would dismiss the application to adduce the fresh evidence since it does not satisfy the criteria for admission: see Palmer v. The Queen (1979), 1979 CanLII 8 (SCC),  1 S.C.R. 759 at 775-76. In particular, since the order made by the trial judge was effectively a consent order and since the order left it to the parties to set the purchase price, the fresh evidence would not have affected the result had it been before him.
Get a full legal research memo!
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexsei.com.