HABIB v HABIB

This Contempt Sanction decision followed an earlier finding by Justice Bourque that the Defendants were in civil contempt for failing to comply with production and procedural Orders (the “Contempt Order”).

The Defendants had been ordered to provide a compliant Affidavit of Records, produce documents, and provide available dates for Questioning. After being found in contempt, the Defendants filed an appeal and sought to avoid compliance. Specifically, the Defendants engaged in improper communications with the Court and asserted that the appeal stayed the proceedings. In response to these communications, the Court rejected the Defendants’ assertion and confirmed that a stay must be formally obtained pursuant to Rule 14.48.

At the Hearing, the Plaintiff argued that the Defendants had not complied with the Contempt Order, while the Defendants maintained that their appeal relieved them of the obligation to comply and limited their Production to a single issue.

Bourque J. emphasized that Contempt Sanctions may still be imposed pursuant to Rule 10.53, where a party’s conduct is persistently defiant, abusive, and undermines the administration of justice. Even though the Defendants had technically purged their contempt by providing Affidavits of Records and producing documents, Justice Bourque found that their conduct warranted sanctions. Specifically, the Court noted that the record reflected repeated obstructionist conduct, including defiance of prior Orders, improper communications, and personal attacks on the Court and counsel for the Plaintiffs. Bourque J. also noted that, by limiting their production to a single issue, the Defendants had effectively abandoned their Counterclaim.

The Court imposed Contempt Sanctions on the Defendants, which included striking their Counterclaim, ordered full solicitor-client costs in favour of the Plaintiff, and imposed a $10,000 fine to address their pattern of process abuse.