F. Yehia

The respondent husband brought an interim motion seeking spousal support and the release of funds from the sale of the matrimonial home to fund his litigation and business expenses.

The court found the respondent demonstrated a prima facie case of need for non-compensatory support, imputing a minimum wage income to him and ordering the applicant to pay $2,082 per month.

The court declined to release the full requested funds from the home sale due to the respondent's failure to provide business disclosure, but ordered $15,000 released specifically to pay his accountant to obtain and disclose those records.

The applicant brought a motion to strike the respondent's pleadings and impose a $224,000 penalty for alleged non-compliance with a previous disclosure order.

The court found that the respondent had substantially complied with the disclosure requirements, with only minor items outstanding, including an explanation for a $25,000 withdrawal made prior to separation.

The court dismissed the motion, holding that striking pleadings is reserved for egregious situations and that the applicant's requested relief was disproportionate and overly aggressive.

The applicant sought costs following a successful motion to strike the respondent's pleadings or for disclosure.

The court found the respondent's failure to produce basic financial disclosure over four years, despite multiple court orders, constituted bad faith and egregious non-compliance.

Applying section 24(8) of the Family Law Rules, the court awarded the applicant full recovery costs in the amount of $43,000, payable immediately.

The applicant wife brought a motion to strike the respondent husband's pleadings for failure to produce financial disclosure, or alternatively, for an order for production with a daily penalty.

The court found that the husband had repeatedly failed to comply with five previous disclosure orders.

The court ordered the husband to provide the outstanding disclosure by a specified date, failing which he would be subject to a $500 daily fine payable to the wife.

Following the dismissal of a motion to remove the respondent's counsel in a family law proceeding, the respondent sought costs of $88,729.26 on a substantial indemnity basis.

The moving parties argued the quantum was unreasonable and sought to have costs fixed at $30,000 payable in the cause.

The court found the respondent's counsel's hours and rates to be somewhat excessive compared to the moving parties' counsel, but acknowledged the importance of the motion.

The court fixed costs at $50,000, payable forthwith, rejecting the moving parties' argument that payment should be deferred until the equalization payment was determined.