Background:

• The court had issued a peremptory order requiring the Defendants to inform the Plaintiff by February 28, 2024, about their willingness to participate in a dispute resolution conference, with the case management conference to follow.

Issues:

• The Plaintiff sought to strike the Defendants’ Statement of Defence due to non-compliance with the court's order.

Court’s Analysis and Decision:

• The Defendants engaged in dilatory tactics and failed to commit to the dispute resolution process, displaying a pattern of avoiding engagement in the litigation and delaying its progress.
• Correspondence from the Defendants was found to be misleading, particularly regarding the representation by new counsel and their availability for a dispute resolution conference.
• The Court found that the Defendants failed to provide clear and truthful information as required by the court’s order and that their actions were consistent with past conduct of delaying litigation.

Outcome:

• The Defendants' Statement of Defence was struck with retroactive effect to February 29, 2024, due to their failure to comply with the court’s order, reflecting the court's low tolerance for misrepresentation and delay tactics in legal proceedings.
• No financial terms specified for costs/awards.