View Single Post
  #23 (permalink)  
Old 01-29-2017, 11:41 AM
otttawa_dad otttawa_dad is offline
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 73
otttawa_dad is on a distinguished road

Good morning Again

So I've done more homework and found the following cases where the theory/princicle of the Maximum contact prevailed. LF32 most of my searches point back to your posts

Thank god for the internet, I pitty parents self-representing years ago!!!

Maximum contact Case Law
  • Benko v Torok, 2013 ONCJ
  • Cavannah v. Johne 2008 Ont. S.C.J. “Maximum Contact Rule Prevails”
  • Young v Young [1993] 4 SCR 3

SUB-NOTE -> I've found the link to the Divorce Act and have linked to it for others

Here's the section in the Divorce Act that describes this principle/theory
Section 16(10) of the Divorce Act which states:

Maximum Contact
In making an order under this section, the court shall give effect to the principle that a child of the marriage should have as much contact with each spouse as is consistent with the best interests of the child and, for that purpose, shall take into consideration the willingness of the person for whom custody is sought to facilitate such contact.


The MINUTES OF SETTLEMENT then become a JUDGE'S ENDORSEMENT. An endorsement is what the Judge writes down as his/her ORDER.

The JUDGE'S ENDORSEMENT, is then written up into a DRAFT COURT ORDER. If the parties have lawyers, this is done by one of the lawyers. The other lawyer, then must approve the DRAFT COURT ORDER as to it's form (the way its drafted - who was there, indicating whether this is a temporary or final order) and content (what it the Court Order actually says, who will do what, when they will do it, etc.).

Once approved by the other lawyer, the DRAFT COURT ORDER then goes back to the Family Court, where it is compared either by the Judge, or a Clerk of the Court against the ENDORSEMENT.

If the DRAFT COURT ORDER and ENDORSEMENT match, and the form is technically correct, the ORDER is APPROVED and then is ISSUED under a COURT SEAL.

The COURT ORDER is now ENFORCEABLE, within the limits proscribed by law.

If I understand this correctly; if the judge agrees this process should be invoked automatically.

Therefore I shouldn't have to request it?
Reply With Quote