E. Rayson

Following a motion concerning interim support on a mature family law file, the court addressed costs after written submissions.

The respondent to the underlying motion sought full indemnity costs exceeding $37,000, citing the other party’s failure to provide proper financial disclosure and litigation conduct that had prolonged the proceedings.

The court emphasized that frank and complete disclosure is fundamental in family litigation and that failure to provide disclosure may justify investigative costs, including expert reports.

While the court declined to award full indemnity costs due to the presence of a settlement offer, it found the responding party’s conduct justified enhanced partial indemnity costs.

Costs of $25,000 inclusive of disbursements were awarded and made enforceable in the same manner as support.

In a family law motion addressing support and disclosure issues, the respondent sought an order striking the applicant's pleadings for repeated failure to comply with court‑ordered financial disclosure and payment obligations.

The court found significant non‑compliance with disclosure orders and drew adverse inferences about the applicant’s income, particularly concerning unreported cash business revenue and personal expenses paid through the business.

While the court declined to strike pleadings due to access‑to‑justice concerns, it relied heavily on the respondent’s evidence and expert accounting analysis to determine income.

The applicant’s income was fixed at $125,000 for interim purposes and the respondent’s at $17,362.

The court ordered increased child support, interim spousal support, and contribution to section 7 expenses, while leaving costs submissions to follow.