The appellants appealed an order dismissing their motion to set aside an ex parte order.
The ex parte order had dismissed their underlying motion regarding entitlement to sale proceeds because they failed to deliver expert material by the deadlines set in two consent scheduling orders.
The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, finding that the motions judge properly exercised his supervisory discretion over the receivership and correctly emphasized the need for compliance with court orders and the integrity of the Commercial List.
