CANADA Trends and Developments Contributed by: Kathryn Manning, John Mather and Max Libman, DMG Advocates LLP
Ultimately, the second motion for a finding of con - tempt against Acenzia was granted by the Ontario Court of Appeal along with harsher penalties for Acen - zia’s continued contempt. The Ontario Court of Appeal ordered that Acenzia pay the full amount of the legal fees owed to Perley-Robertson, Hill & McDougall into court pending the resolution of Acenzia’s responding action. If Acenzia failed to pay the amount into court by the required time, its responding action against Perley-Robertson, Hill & McDougall would be deemed discontinued. Lessons learned While the Ontario Rules of Civil Procedure do not allow judgment creditors to use a contempt motion to enforce judgments for payment, Perley - Robert- son , Hill & McDougall LLP v Eureka 93 Inc . seemingly opens the door for judgment creditors to use con - tempt motions to have a court preserve the funds that would make up said payments.
88 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook