In an ongoing family law trial, the self-represented respondent father failed to attend the continuation of the trial, citing suicidal ideation and mental health issues triggered by the proceedings.
The applicant mother opposed a further adjournment, noting the respondent's functional behavior outside of court and his history of delaying the trial.
Applying the factors from Moudry, the court found no procedural unfairness in proceeding, as the respondent had already provided substantial evidence and his absence appeared voluntary rather than medically necessary.
The court denied the adjournment request and ordered the trial to continue, permitting the respondent to appoint a non-lawyer agent if he chose not to attend personally.
