The applicant brought a motion to strike the respondent's pleadings or, in the alternative, for possession of a jointly held rental property due to the respondent's failure to pay court-ordered child and spousal support.
The respondent sought to reduce his support obligations to zero, claiming an inability to work due to depression.
The court rejected the respondent's evidence of disability as unreliable and noted his failure to disclose significant financial transactions.
Relying on Rule 1(8) of the Family Law Rules, the court granted the applicant possession of the rental property to manage and receive income, ordering the respondent to vacate the premises.
