2 total
Appeal dismissed; motion judge's reasons for foreclosing defence were discernible from the record.
The appellants appealed an order that foreclosed their ability to defend the action, arguing the motion judge failed to provide reasons.
The Court of Appeal agreed that reasons were warranted for such a serious decision, but found the reasons were discernible from the record.
The appeal was dismissed for the reasons previously given by the court in refusing a stay pending appeal.
Stay pending appeal denied in promissory-note collection dispute after repeated disclosure non-compliance.
The appellants sought a stay pending appeal from an order striking their statement of defence for non-compliance with documentary disclosure obligations and a prior peremptory order.
The motion judge held the proposed appeal was weak, found no irreparable harm, and concluded the balance of convenience and justice of the case favoured refusal of a stay.
