Dawud v. Dawud – Non-Disclosure and Striking Pleadings

In this case, the mother brought a Motion in which she sought, among other things, the striking of the father’s pleadings because of his failure to comply with court orders.

The father failed to comply with a November 14, 2008 order requiring him to provide financial disclosure. Not only did the father fail to comply with this order, he also failed to provide the disclosure required by the Child Support Guidelines. The little disclosure that he did provide was described by the judge as “minimal, unexplained, lacking in necessary detail, incomprehensible and ultimately did not constitute financial disclosure in any meaningful sense”.

In addition, the father filed a 14B Motion the day after the Motion was heard in which he sought the admittance of his affidavit sworn the same day (i.e. the day after the Motion).

The father’s main excuse for failing to provide the necessary disclosure was that he moved to Guyana, so providing documents to Canadian courts was difficult and required more time than he was given.

Justice Cohen was not impressed. She found that the 14B Motion was inappropriate as it was tantamount to requesting the rehearing of the Motion. She also found the father’s excuse unconvincing, especially considering that he did not even manage to produce his Canadian Income Tax Returns and that he had constant telephone, fax, and email access while he was in Guyana. As such, the father’s failure to provide the court ordered disclosure was deemed wilful because the father showed no evidence of any sincere effort to provide the necessary documentation.

As a result of the wilful breach of the November 14, 2008 court order, the father’s Answer was struck and costs in the amount of $500.00 for the 14B Motion were awarded.

This Post Has One Comment
  1. There could be no other decision than the one rendered by Justice Cohen. Striking pleadings is a necessary result in a case such as this and in the many cases we deal with. Disclosure is fundamental to both the determination of equalization and support issues. Without the proper and necessary financial disclosure a case cannot move forward. Judges often give the non disclosing party an opportunity to comply with court orders for disclosure. The time frame is usually short, and without being able to prove attempts to obtain the disclosure, the Judge will strike pleadings.

    Striking pleadings is a wonderful and effective remedy that sends a message, loud and clear, to the non disclosing party. On a personal note, it is very satisfying to obtain such an order and lets the complaining party know that the courts do provide justice.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *