Quote:
Originally Posted by riverbag
After our last conference, it has become clear to me that my Ex is going to claim anything to try ensure she doesn't have to settle so I am left with no choice but to prepare for trial. Anyone else self represented go to trial, I may need some assistance, but I have no choice, the longer this goes on, the stronger her "Status Quo" claim will be.
|
[1]. At trial, the court will examine how the status quo came about and is only one factor. Interim disposition is a makeshift until the correct answer can be discovered.
http://www.ottawadivorce.com/forum/f...atus-quo-2629/
...In Buckholtz v. Lamey, 1999 WL 33198747 (Ont. S.C.J.),[1999] O.J. No. 4851, Madam Justice C.J. Robertson held the view:
...17 Legal submissions were made about the effect of the child's two-year status quo with the father. The father's lawyer presented cases where the continuation of the status quo was given great weight but they are distinguished by their facts.
18 The legal weight of status quo was succinctly stated in R. v. R. (1983), 34 R.F.L. (2d) 277 (Alta. C.A.) at 283:
It is at the time of an interim disposition that one should not lightly disturb de facto arrangements: See Cropper v. Cropper (1974), 16 R.F.L. 113 (Ont. C.A.).We should remind ourselves that interim custody is just that: a makeshift solution until the correct answer can be discovered. If a judge could tell what is best at the outset, there is no need for an interim order. Interim orders are designed to minimize conflict between parents and cause the least amount of harm to the child pending determination of the cause.
The interim dispute here was resolved by agreement. The parties sensibly made a working arrangement until trial. It does not follow that, because it worked, that arrangement is best for the child.
And the parties cannot, at trial, be treated as having somehow waived the right to put a different proposal. Indeed, such a view would discourage future litigants from agreeing to workable interim arrangements. I would not encourage turmoil in this way. Also, courts should take great care not to permit a new status quo (created by delay) to decide what was not decided by interim disposition
19 A child's development, attachment and routine do not hibernate while the court process winds its way along. The consequence of trial delay worries non-custodial parents.
Status quo is one historical indicator of stability for the court's consideration but custody is a present/future-oriented order based on all of the circumstances that comprise best interests....
[2]. Bond is also a critical factor for consideration as enumerated under Section 24. See Parks v. Barnes, 2002 CanLII 18301 (ON C.A.),
CanLII - 2002 CanLII 18301 (ON C.A.)
[3]. interim Conduct of both parties is also significant consideration under Section 24 and how each parent included the other parent in the life of the child. Joint Custody is often awarded to preserve a child/parent relationship in cases of high conflict or alienation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by riverbag
Thanks Dadtotheend,
I hope she comes to her senses and agrees to 50/50, but to get her there I'm gonna schedule a trial Management conference and see if I can give her a gentle push in that direction.
|
[4]. Good, push the matter forward for resolution.
Quote:
Originally Posted by riverbag
Hi all,
Headed to assignment court next, anyone have any experience with this?? I haven't been able to find anything online, though I haven't searched the forum yet  |
[5]. All the cases on the trial list are generally handled at once. Solicitors of the parties are present. The Trial co-coordinator most likely will also be present with a Judge presiding.
[6]. Assignment court is designed to bring the parties together for last ditch opportunity for settlement of all or part of the issues. Formal estimation of how much time is required for trial for each matter will be solicited from the Trial Co-coordinator.
Quote:
Originally Posted by riverbag
I'm not special, just persistent. I think a tonne don't go to trial because the Dads are convinced they don't have a chance and they cannot afford to go any further. I've read a number of legal books saying that I don't have a chance, I've had a large number of legal professionals say that I should settle but I can't see how that helps the kids. 2 judges have asked point blank "Why not 50/50??" and the claims made to deny that have been false. I'm going to take this all the way and if I lose and get ordered to pay costs, so be it, but I have to see this through....for the children.
|
[7]. You don't have a chance? Think positive - A wealth of information is located over at Canlii that states otherwise.
[8]. In summary, your facts are not clear on the face. However, if your hands are clean (in compliance of court orders as they arose) with evidence of historical communication and co-operation prevailing throughout interim disposition, and weighing that against (Kaplanis 2005 OAC, Ladisa 2005 OAC, Ursic 2006 OAC, Walsh 1998 OAC, Lefebvre 2002 OAC - I can only predict that you have a good chance of some sort of joint custody.
[9]. Lastly, Custody and Access claims are a present future consideration weighing all factors as enumerated under Section 24 of the Children's Law Reform Act or (Divorce Act) whichever the case might be - See Bucholtz v. Lamey above.
lv
03-18-2010, 11:11 PM
Looks like we're gonna have a trial
Similar Threads
