The Plaintiffs sought a Declaration that the Defendants were in civil contempt pursuant to Rules 5.12, 10.51, 10.52, and 10.53, and an Order striking the Defendants’ Statement of Defence and Counterclaim. The Court found the Defendants were in contempt pursuant to three different Court Orders. After considering the jurisprudence on the appropriate sanction for contempt, the Court struck the Defendants’ Statement of Defence and Counterclaim, concluding that striking the pleadings was a sufficient sanction in the circumstances, and that neither imprisonment nor a fine was warranted.