Ottawa Divorce .com Forums


User CP

New posts

Advertising

  Ottawa Divorce .com Forums > Main Category > Domestic Violence

Domestic Violence Dealing with abuse and violence. Getting support and help.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
  #21 (permalink)  
Old 03-25-2013, 10:04 AM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: 2 miles south, of the middle of nowhere
Posts: 500
murphyslaw is on a distinguished road
Default

Tort law does not have the same level of proof as in Criminal Law.Quite simply it is on balance of probabilities,50%+1.Trying to get treatment for PTSD or OSD would be common enough down this route, I believe.PTSD can be quite crippling so I hope this works out for you .Its unfair that the cost of being a victim, is borne by the victim in most cases.
Reply With Quote
  #22 (permalink)  
Old 03-25-2013, 10:07 AM
hadenough's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 2,468
hadenough is on a distinguished road
Default

"Its unfair that the cost of being a victim, is borne by the victim in most cases."

Welcome to Canada. A haven (imo) for criminals.
Reply With Quote
  #23 (permalink)  
Old 03-25-2013, 10:19 AM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 407
mom2three is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by caranna View Post
From my understanding of tort law, I don't think you need to "prove" a wrong.

About being judged: It is not about depression or anxiety, which is nothing to be ashamed of if you have it. The judging I have cautioned about is not to blame the victim.

I also doubt I will be awarded damages in a tort suit, but it is worthwhile considering, even though I'm principally seeking costs awarded for the counselling I require as a result of the abuse suffered.
That's not necessarily true. There are different categories of torts: intentional or unintentional.

If the tort is intentional (assault and battery are intentional torts), the claimant bears the burden of establishing the required elements of the tort; that is, is doen't matter whether the claimant 'suffered' any harm, only that the elements of the tort existed.

With an unintentional tort(negligence), the big difference is that the claimant must establish that some sort of loss was suffered.

It would depend what claim was being brought forth.
Reply With Quote
  #24 (permalink)  
Old 03-25-2013, 10:19 AM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 908
caranna is on a distinguished road
Default

Yes, Murphyslaw. The cost of being a victim is very high. Not only emotionally, physically and spiritually, but financially as well. And I have spent quite some time having to deal with feelings of righteous anger at him, and also at myself. I finally realized that a lot of that anger was self-directed. When the veil causing my blindness was finally lifted, I became very angry at myself for tolerating and hiding his abuse for such a long time.

Hadenough, I was his haven.
Reply With Quote
  #25 (permalink)  
Old 03-25-2013, 05:37 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 908
caranna is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mom2three View Post
That's not necessarily true. There are different categories of torts: intentional or unintentional.

If the tort is intentional (assault and battery are intentional torts), the claimant bears the burden of establishing the required elements of the tort; that is, is doen't matter whether the claimant 'suffered' any harm, only that the elements of the tort existed.

With an unintentional tort(negligence), the big difference is that the claimant must establish that some sort of loss was suffered.

It would depend what claim was being brought forth.
Thanks for differentiating the types of torts. Very much appreciated.
Reply With Quote
  #26 (permalink)  
Old 03-25-2013, 05:56 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 908
caranna is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mom2three View Post
Caranna:

You may well be dealing with an entire area of law, tort law. Essentially what you are asking for is damages as a result of his actions.

This is the most recent case involving a tort action combined with a family law application:

CanLII - 2013 ONSC 1626 (CanLII)

Good read and it is an awesome decision from which to explore other cases where precedents have been established.
I read through this case today and found it very informative and interesting. It should be required reading for every family lawyer.

One of the things that stood out was on page 7, under the heading "The Law"

There may even be systemic discouragement. Over the years our family court system has worked so hard to get away from blame and recrimination - by discouraging "inflammatory" affidavits in favour of case management; by telling conflicted parents to focus more on the future than the past; by promoting conciliation and collaborative dispute resolution; by granting "no fault" divorces.

We have promoted a misconception: that fault never matters."
( last three words originally emphasized in italics).

This is but a small portion of the writing.

Thanks again, mom2three. This case document may well be a ground-breaking one.
Reply With Quote
  #27 (permalink)  
Old 07-07-2013, 12:58 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 908
caranna is on a distinguished road
Default

I found this case very helpful, referred to me by Mom2three:

CanLII - 2013 ONSC 1626 (CanLII)

Best wishes!
Reply With Quote
  #28 (permalink)  
Old 07-07-2013, 01:02 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 908
caranna is on a distinguished road
Default

^^^I didn't intend to dig up my thread, just to reply to SoccerMom73's earlier one. My error, or perhaps it is for the best.
Reply With Quote
  #29 (permalink)  
Old 07-07-2013, 04:12 PM
Janibel's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Way up North
Posts: 1,496
Janibel will become famous soon enough
Default


''We have promoted a misconception: that fault never matters."

This is exactly why I am so frustrated with family law in this country. How the **** could fault not be considered when a spouse's violence causes the other spouse to lose work due to injuries and/or mental anguish, not to mention the long term issues associated with PTSD?

Same argument for a husband who's wife is 'adultering' right, left and sideways and the poor buggar has to pay spousal support to her until he is pushing daisies? It boggles the mind!

By adopting no fault standards we are disregarding the whole concept of accountability between spouses. Family law is not about justice or even fairness for that matter, it usually boils down to who can invest in the better lawyer.
Reply With Quote
  #30 (permalink)  
Old 07-07-2013, 11:18 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 504
frustratedwithex is an unknown quantity at this point
Default

A court of law is not the place for this. Family court doesn't care if you had an affair, and they shouldn't.

A divorce requires division of property and support for kids. Those two things are not decided by who slept with who. No one should have to prove that they want a divorce.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:16 PM.