Executive Summary: Key Legal and Evidentiary Issues

• Dispute centered on a settlement agreement between Ashley Gesner and CIBC involving credit reporting and debt forgiveness.

• Plaintiff alleged the agreement was signed under duress, coercion, and without informed consent.

• Defendants successfully argued that the agreement was valid, voluntary, and fulfilled in accordance with its terms.

• Court found no legal basis for rescinding the consent dismissal order or awarding damages.

• Plaintiff's post-settlement conduct, including unfounded allegations against opposing counsel, led to a special costs award.

• The case tested the threshold for setting aside consent orders and evaluating self-represented litigant conduct.

Facts and outcome of the case

Ashley Gesner brought a civil action against the Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce (CIBC), along with two of its employees, Behzad Hatamikia and Amit Chaturvedi. The case stemmed from a long-running dispute over a student loan. The plaintiff alleged that she had been overcharged interest beyond contractual terms and sought reimbursement, credit score restoration, and broader equitable remedies for alleged mistreatment.

In March 2023, Ms. Gesner filed her notice of civil claim seeking $94,000 and restoration of her credit standing, asserting she had been the victim of cyber fraud and poor advice. The matter progressed through multiple procedural stages, including settlement discussions and a change in legal counsel for the defendants. A settlement was ultimately reached in April 2024. The agreement involved CIBC forgiving $11,434.32 in debt, paying $15,500 to Ms. Gesner, and reporting to credit bureaus that her debt was satisfied.

After the settlement and the court’s consent dismissal order in June 2024, Ms. Gesner attempted to reopen the matter. She filed multiple applications asserting duress, intimidation, breach of contract, discrimination, and human rights violations. She claimed that the credit reporting terms of the agreement were not met and alleged misconduct by legal counsel and systemic abuse by the defendants. She also sought a sealing order, punitive damages, and injunctive relief.

The court rejected all of the plaintiff’s claims. It found that the settlement was entered voluntarily, that CIBC fulfilled its credit reporting obligations by ensuring the plaintiff’s rating was updated to R1, and that there was no evidence of duress, fraud, or breach of contract. The judge noted that the plaintiff had been advised of her right to legal counsel, and she accepted the terms knowingly.

Importantly, the court strongly rebuked the plaintiff’s conduct after the settlement. She had made baseless and serious allegations against former and current defence lawyers, attempted to relitigate settled matters, and disregarded procedural fairness. The court characterized this behavior as malicious and reprehensible and awarded special costs to the defendants as a punitive measure.

In conclusion, the court upheld the validity of the settlement agreement and dismissed the plaintiff’s application to rescind it. The defendants prevailed, and Ms. Gesner was ordered to pay special costs for her conduct in pursuing unfounded claims and attacking opposing counsel.