Daniel A. Robertson

Following the death of the applicant in a family law proceeding, the Estate sought to continue the application for equalization and compel the respondent to produce expert reports valuing her corporate assets.

The respondent moved for security for costs, arguing the Estate was insolvent and the litigation was primarily driven by the Estate's counsel to recover unpaid fees.

The court ordered the Estate to post $5,000 in security for costs, finding that the Estate resided outside Ontario and had no assets in the province.

The court also ordered the respondent to produce expert reports to substantiate the corporate values claimed in her net family property statement.

The applicant, a prominent religious leader, sought a publication ban and sealing order regarding a paternity application, initially claiming he had no sexual relations with the respondent.

After DNA testing confirmed he was the father, he continued to seek the ban to protect his reputation and commercial interests.

The court dismissed the request, applying the open courts principle and finding that the public interest in transparency outweighed the applicant's desire to suppress truthful information about his conduct.