The appellant appealed a decision of the Superior Court of Justice, arguing the application judge erred in declining to address his constitutional arguments and in finding he had not shown an inability to pay support.
The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, holding that the appellant could not collaterally attack the constitutionality of the law applied to strike his pleadings in prior proceedings or the support order itself, which had already been unsuccessfully appealed.
The Court also found the record supported the application judge's conclusion regarding the appellant's ability to pay.
