View Single Post
  #4 (permalink)  
Old 10-22-2012, 01:26 PM
Tayken's Avatar
Tayken Tayken is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 6,563
Tayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant future
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nadia View Post
As I sat there watching my ex-husband last week, fire off allegation after allegation in his oral submissions and play the "victim" card, I was struck by how litigation only seems to confound the problem, by providing litigants a platform to vent.
Phil Epstein, probably one of (or the most) respected family law lawyers in Ontario has been quoted stating:

Quote:
Only 10 per cent of cases go to the court system, and an even smaller percentage of those - less than 5 per cent, Mr. Epstein says - go to trial. All are considered high conflict, "and it's no coincidence that the same percentage of the population - 10 per cent - have borderline personality disorders or mental health issues," he says, adding that delays in the court system often happen because there is not enough capacity to handle the number of cases.
The divorce that never ends - The Globe and Mail

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nadia View Post
It was "venting" because none of his allegations were supported by any written evidence. He had failed to submit a response to my application for motion to vary (he claimed he had never received it); he had not submitted a case conference brief (although he did not deny he had recieved mine) and he had made zero effort to settle (although he had received several offers to settle from me).
Standard set of excuses that negative advocate lawyers try as well. Doesn't work when a lawyer does this stupid stuff but, some times judges are more lenient.

I have seen a senior SC judge hold a returning motion on an emergency and order the lawyer who's client made the application to the emergency go back to their office and get the materials that were served upon them by the Respondent properly. Funniest thing to have to watch a senior judge, tell a lawyer to do their job, go get the document that was properly serviced and come back in the afternoon.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nadia View Post
But because this was a Case Conference and he was given an hour to speak his mind (uninterrupted); he walked out of the court room with a feeling that he had been "heard" and somehow been "validated" in his sense of reality.
Let him. You can't change someone like that. They can only change themselves.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nadia View Post
My question is this, how useful is it to attend a case conference/or mediation with a party that is high conflict and has no mind to settle on anything?
Mediation fails when:

1. One or both parties to the mediation have a mental illness.
2. One or both parties to the mediation have a substance abuse issue.

Good Luck!
Tayken