Canada v. Innovation and Development Partners Inc.
A-91-94
Décary J.A.
21/3/94
11 pp.
Appeal from Motions Judge's order ([1994] 3 F.C. D-12) allowing action to be heard even if respondent in contempt of court-Appellant applied and obtained trial date for all three actions at same time and was forced to request trial be postponed sine die because of refusal of respondent to obey orders of Federal Court to make full production of documents-Whether right of party in contempt of court to be heard by court before contempt purged-Power to refuse to grant audience to party in contempt discretionary: Apple Computer, Inc. v. Mackintosh Computers Ltd., [1988] 1 F.C. 191 (C.A.)-To successfully attack exercise of discretion, party has to demonstrate Motions Judge proceeded on erroneous principle or misapprehension of facts, or order not just and reasonable-One error of principle to take into account irrelevant factors or to ignore and fail to take into account relevant factors-General rule: party in contempt for non-obedience will not be heard in proceedings until contempt purged-To exercise discretion to permit appeal to proceed or to refuse, Court must regard particular circumstances of contempt and effect on proper administration of justice-Motions Judge took into account irrelevant considerations-Furthermore, without authority to question, as he did, finding of contempt-Federal Court Act, s. 50(1)(b) empowering Court to stay proceedings in interest of justice; respondent's continuing defiance and arrogance amount to abuse of process-Appeal allowed-Actions stayed until Court orders obeyed and respondent approaches Court with clean hands-Federal Court Act, R.S.C., 1985, c. F-7, s. 50(1)(b).