This Decision dealt with whether a provision in an Order by an Applications Judge was an Attachment Order under the Civil Enforcement Act, RSA 2000, c C-15, or an Injunction Order.

The Court found that the Order was, in substance and intent, an Attachment Order designed to preserve property, which is within the jurisdiction of Applications Judges under the Civil Enforcement Act. The misapprehension of the Order as injunctive relief had led to an incorrect decision by the Chambers Judge.

The Court exercised its authority under Rule 14.75(1)(c) and made the Judgment that should have been made. The Court granted the Appeal and directed, pursuant to Rule 10.53(1)(d)(i), that the pleadings of the Respondents in the consolidated action be struck due to their failure to purge contempt and participate in the proceedings.