F. Damji

The moving party brought a motion under Rule 60.11(8) of the Rules of Civil Procedure to vary the sentences imposed on him for contempt of court, which originally totaled 18 to 21 months.

The court found that the moving party had purged his contempt regarding one order by completing an examination in aid of execution, and had made good faith efforts to pay a settlement amount, paying $472,000.

Acknowledging these changed circumstances, the court reduced the sentences for several breaches, resulting in a new global consecutive sentence of 14 months imprisonment.

The applicants sought a penalty for the respondent, who was previously found in contempt for multiple breaches of six court orders related to the disclosure of financial information for several franchise businesses.

The court found that the respondent deliberately and continuously flouted the orders to frustrate the applicants' ability to monitor the businesses, which ultimately lost all value.

The court sentenced the respondent to consecutive terms of imprisonment totaling between 18 and 21 months less a day, and ordered him to pay substantial indemnity costs of $369,644.26.

The applicants brought motions for contempt against the respondents, specifically Fateh Singh Sidhu, for breaching eight court orders related to the disclosure of financial and operational information regarding several Popeye's franchises.

The court found that the orders were clear and unequivocal, and that Sidhu deliberately and willfully disobeyed them.

The court concluded beyond a reasonable doubt that Sidhu was in civil contempt and adjourned the matter for a penalty hearing.