The plaintiffs have not identified any conflicting decisions as required in the first part of the 62.02(4) test. There is, in my view, no serious debate that would arise about the correctness of this decision. His decision accords with the prevailing case law and is not in conflict with any of the leading cases. It is in clear harmony with the spirit of Boily v. Carleton Condominium, at p. 56, para. 175: This is not to say that context is irrelevant to the interpretation of an order for the purposes of contempt proceedings. Given the quasi-criminal nature of the proceedings, any doubt should be resolved in favour of the alleged contemnor.
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.