In a prolonged neighbour dispute involving drainage and nuisance issues, the moving parties sought further contempt remedies after the responding party repeatedly failed to comply with prior court orders requiring implementation of an engineered drainage solution or payment into court for the work.
The responding party argued that the court‑ordered design was flawed and attempted to relitigate the merits through expert opinions and collateral proceedings.
The court held that a litigant must obey a valid court order until it is set aside through proper appellate processes, regardless of personal disagreement with the underlying remedy.
Applying principles of contempt enforcement and res judicata, the court rejected attempts to revisit issues previously addressed on appeal.
A custodial sanction and compliance conditions were imposed to compel obedience to the outstanding orders.
