Key Issues:

1. Whether repeated non-compliance with court orders warrants the striking of the defendant's pleadings.
2. Whether financial disclosure obligations from a production order had been fulfilled.

Background:

• Mr. McBurney was ordered to produce financial documents related to Medix’s operations during a period when he operated solo.
• Despite multiple court orders (Inglis Order, Clackson Order, and subsequent directives), Mr. McBurney failed to provide sufficient financial records or explain the non-compliance adequately.

Findings:

• The court determined that McBurney had access to financial records during the solo operation period and could have reconstructed missing information but did not.
• His non-compliance with court orders over 28 months, including missing invoices, bank statements, and financial reports, was deemed deliberate.

Sanctions:

1. Striking of McBurney’s statement of defense and counterclaim due to deliberate disobedience of court orders.
2. Cancellation of daily fines imposed previously, but costs were awarded to the plaintiffs on a solicitor-client basis.

Legal Principles Cited:

• Rule 10.53 of the Alberta Rules of Court for contempt penalties.
• Factors influencing sanctions, such as deliberate defiance, history of litigation, and impact on justice.

Outcome:

• McBurney’s defenses and counterclaims were struck.
• Plaintiffs were awarded costs, and additional relief requests by the plaintiffs, such as asset return orders, were dismissed due to lack of legal basis invoked.
• The total costs or specific amounts for the solicitor-client costs are not detailed in the judgment provided.