The respondents obtained an Anton Piller order and subsequent orders requiring the appellant to allow access to his premises to re-image computer hard drives.
The motion judge found the appellant in contempt for failing to comply with these orders and struck his statements of defence for failing to pay costs.
The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal, finding that the motion judge failed to properly apply the three-pronged test for civil contempt, including the requirement for clear and unequivocal orders and proof beyond a reasonable doubt.
The Court also set aside the order striking the defences, holding that the motion judge improperly reversed the onus and failed to give the appellant an opportunity to cure his default.
