2 total
The court declined to strike the respondent's pleadings for non-disclosure but ordered extensive financial production.
The applicant brought a motion to strike the respondent's pleadings for non-compliance with disclosure orders, or alternatively, sought specific disclosure.
The respondent failed to file responding materials and did not attend the motion.
The court declined to strike the pleadings, citing the drastic nature of the remedy, the unresolved parenting component, and the need for the respondent's participation to ensure a just result.
Instead, the court ordered the respondent to provide extensive financial and medical disclosure within 60 days, including corporate tax information for a company he directs, and information about his wife's income.
The applicant was granted leave to renew the motion to strike if the respondent fails to comply with the new disclosure order.
Costs submissions were also ordered.
Court resolves equalization, imputes post-retirement income, and sets off child support against spousal support arrears.
The applicant wife and respondent husband separated after an 18-year marriage.
The applicant sought spousal support and equalization, while the respondent sought child support and equalization.
The court divided the respondent's pension at source and imputed additional income to him for post-retirement work.
The court found the applicant liable for child support arrears for the parties' adult children attending post-secondary education.
The court also found the applicant entitled to compensatory and non-compensatory spousal support.
After setting off the child support arrears against the equalization payment and spousal support arrears, the respondent was ordered to pay the applicant a net amount of $7,340.14, plus ongoing spousal support.
