not present)

The court considered a motion by the respondent, D.M.S., to reinstate his pleadings after they were struck for failure to comply with disclosure orders in a protracted family law dispute.

The court reviewed the respondent’s compliance with various disclosure items, found significant deficiencies remained, and considered the respondent’s litigation conduct.

The court exercised its discretion to refuse reinstatement, citing ongoing non-compliance, confusion in accounting, and prejudicial litigation behaviour.

Costs were awarded to the applicant and added parties.

This is a costs decision in a child protection matter under the Child and Family Services Act.

The Children's Aid Society of Brant apprehended a child based on allegations of physical and emotional abuse in the home where the child resided with his mother and the V. family.

The matter was resolved within two months through a consent order and subsequent supervision services agreement, with the application withdrawn.

The mother sought costs against the Society.

The court dismissed the costs claim, finding that the Society conducted a thorough investigation, acted fairly and reasonably, and properly reassessed its position as new information became available.

The court held that the Society's conduct met the standard of fairness expected of child protection agencies.