Hugh MacKenzie

The plaintiffs brought a motion to find the self-represented defendant in civil contempt of three previous court orders.

The orders required the defendant to remove defamatory online broadcasts and videos about the plaintiffs and prohibited him from posting further defamatory material.

The court applied the three-part test for civil contempt and found beyond a reasonable doubt that the orders were clear, the defendant had actual knowledge of them, and he intentionally breached them by failing to remove the posts and by publishing new defamatory content.

The defendant was found in contempt, with a penalty hearing to be scheduled.

The plaintiff brought a motion for summary judgment to recognize and enforce a default judgment obtained in Maryland against the defendants for $107,797.63 USD.

The defendants opposed the motion, arguing that the Maryland court lacked jurisdiction, the judgment was obtained by fraud, natural justice was denied, and enforcement would be contrary to public policy.

The court found that the Maryland court properly assumed jurisdiction, the defendants failed to prove fraud or denial of natural justice, and there was no genuine issue requiring a trial.

The motion to enforce the foreign judgment was granted.

The appellant appealed the dismissal of his motion to set aside two previous orders under Rule 25(19)(b) of the Family Law Rules.

He argued the motion judge failed to take a contextual approach to setting aside a default judgment and that the previous judge lacked jurisdiction.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, agreeing with the motion judge that alleged legal errors or jurisdictional issues are not 'mistakes' correctable under Rule 25(19)(b), but rather appealable errors.