Mr. Taylor did appeal to the TCC and the parties agreed to ask the court to decide whether, as a matter of law, Mr. Taylor could deny the agreement with CRA on the basis that it had been extracted from him under undue pressure. Justice Woods didn't believe Mr. Taylor; she noted that he had experienced legal advice and months to think about CRA's offer.
Noting that the context of the meeting was important, Justice Woods said:
 First, I conclude that the agreement was freely made. Mr. Taylor understood what he was agreeing to, and he had ample opportunity to consider his options and consult with his lawyer prior to the meeting. ...
 I also find that Mr. Taylor was not unduly pressured into making the settlement. Pressure was exerted, but it was not undue.
She rejected other complaints Mr. Taylor's lawyers raised. They appealed to the FCA, which dismissed the appeal. Next, they sought "leave" (permission) to appeal to the SCC; a panel of three SCC judges refused to hear the appeal. So, Mr. Taylor must accept the deal he made.
See Terry E. Taylor v. Her Majesty the Queen, (2013 SCC)