In Debono v. JCD Property Ltd. (Ont CA, 2026) the Ontario Court of Appeal dismissed an appeal, here brought against a motion order "striking the appellants’ statement of defence", here for "repeated and continuous defaults by the appellants":
[29] There is no error in the motion judge’s decision to strike the appellants’ statement of defence. The order was warranted as a result of the repeated and continuous defaults by the appellants. The motion judge considered the relevant factors set out in Falcon Lumber Limited v. 2480375 Ontario Inc., 2020 ONCA 310, with respect to striking pleadings due to a party’s failure to produce documents. These factors include whether the party’s failure is deliberate or inadvertent; whether the failure is clear and unequivocal; whether the defaulting party provides a reasonable explanation for its default and a credible commitment to cure the default quickly; whether the substance of the default is material or minimal; the extent to which the party remains in default at the time of the request to strike the pleading; and the impact of the default on the ability of the court to do justice in the particular case: at para. 51.
....
[31] A motion judge’s decision to strike pleadings is entitled to deference on appeal when exercised on proper principles: Rimon v. CBC Dragon Inc., 2024 ONCA 128, at para. 14. ....
The author has waived all copyright and related or neighboring rights to this Isthatlegal.ca webpage.
