The applicant brought an ex parte motion to enforce a family law judgment, seeking to pierce the corporate veil of an offshore company, issue garnishments, and obtain a vesting order for the respondent's shares.
The court granted leave to proceed ex parte due to the respondent's history of contempt and asset depletion.
However, the court adjourned the requests to pierce the corporate veil and issue garnishments to allow notice to affected third parties.
The court dismissed the request for a vesting order, finding it was functus officio and lacked jurisdiction under the Family Law Act, Family Law Rules, or Rules of Civil Procedure to grant new substantive relief after the final judgment had been entered.