The respondent spouse brought motions seeking to set aside a prior order striking his pleadings for failure to comply with disclosure obligations and to extend the time for delivering financial disclosure in a family support proceeding.
The court reviewed the lengthy procedural history and concluded the moving party had repeatedly ignored disclosure orders and failed to provide any reasonable explanation for the prolonged non-compliance.
Applying appellate guidance on the discretionary power to strike pleadings for litigation misconduct, the court declined to reinstate the pleadings.
However, to assist the court’s fact‑finding process on outstanding support issues, the moving party was granted limited participation rights at trial, restricted to cross‑examination and submissions.
Costs were awarded against the moving party.
