Ottawa Divorce .com Forums


User CP

New posts

Advertising

  Ottawa Divorce .com Forums > Main Category > Divorce & Family Law

Divorce & Family Law This forum is for discussing any of the legal issues involved in your divorce.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
  #21 (permalink)  
Old 10-26-2017, 12:29 AM
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Posts: 1,681
trinton has a little shameless behaviour in the past
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by blinkandimgone View Post
Was it stated in the agreement that she could not seek certain types of employment or work at certain times?
Again, your arguments are about the mother's rights and have no bearing into the best interests of a child.

Quote:
The Chambers judge found the affidavit evidence demonstrated a material change in circumstances based upon the following factors which are set out at para. 8 of his Fiat. They read as follows:
i. [The child] is no longer a baby. She is of an age where it is reasonable for her to spend more time away from her mother and has a need to spend more time with her father.

ii. The parents have in the summer months extended parenting time for the father beyond that contemplated by the interspousal agreement.

iii. The father’s work schedule has changed such that he is now able to provide full-time care on a predictable schedule and thus his ability to meet [the child’s] needs has changed in a fundamental way.

iv. [The child] is about to start kindergarten.
http://canlii.ca/t/fsrj1

There was never any order or agreement that the father could not seek certain types of employment or work at certain times. Your argument is mute.

Last edited by trinton; 10-26-2017 at 12:36 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #22 (permalink)  
Old 10-26-2017, 12:40 AM
blinkandimgone's Avatar
Moderator
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Lucknow
Posts: 5,225
blinkandimgone has a spectacular aura aboutblinkandimgone has a spectacular aura aboutblinkandimgone has a spectacular aura about
Default

Ok. Good luck!
Reply With Quote
  #23 (permalink)  
Old 10-26-2017, 01:46 AM
Hand of Justice
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: In the Shadows
Posts: 3,143
Links17 is on a distinguished road
Default

Custody is based on REAL AVAILABILITY. It doesn't make sense to have "custody" of a child if your schedule doesn't allow. There is case law where parents work schedules preventing them from "really" spending time with their kids (i.e: working an afternoon shift and not seeing your kid except for an hour in the morning)

Is it material?
Is it a permanent state of affairs?
Reply With Quote
  #24 (permalink)  
Old 10-26-2017, 01:52 PM
Tayken's Avatar
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 blinkandimgone View Post
Ok. Good luck!
Hey! Just because you put "ok" before it doesn't mean you are not infringing on my (TM) (C) on "Good luck!". You have been warned!!!!
Reply With Quote
  #25 (permalink)  
Old 10-26-2017, 05:47 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 2,809
Pursuinghappiness will become famous soon enough
Default

Is it wrong that I want to start a set of parody threads that illustrate the petty nit-pickiness?

1. Mom keeps reading "Hop on Pop" to kid far past recommended reading age. Is this something I can use against her in court?
2. Kids shoes are often on the wrong feet..clearly mom isn't paying attention. Should I get kid a psych evaluation?
3. Daycare worker gave me obvious stank-eye when I picked kid up. Can I compel court to make mom quit job so that kid doesn't have to attend day-care?

(Sorry dealing with stupid court action and feeling punchy today)...
Reply With Quote
  #26 (permalink)  
Old 10-26-2017, 06:18 PM
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Posts: 1,681
trinton has a little shameless behaviour in the past
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pursuinghappiness View Post
Is it wrong that I want to start a set of parody threads that illustrate the petty nit-pickiness?

1. Mom keeps reading "Hop on Pop" to kid far past recommended reading age. Is this something I can use against her in court?
Please point me to such thread and to a post where the words " Is this something I can use against her in court?" comes from me ?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pursuinghappiness View Post
2. Kids shoes are often on the wrong feet..clearly mom isn't paying attention. Should I get kid a psych evaluation?
Again, point me to a thread where I look to take the kid for psych evaluation for something mom has tone ?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pursuinghappiness View Post
3. Daycare worker gave me obvious stank-eye when I picked kid up. Can I compel court to make mom quit job so that kid doesn't have to attend day-care?
Lastly, point me to a thread where I asked to "compel court to make mom quit job" I simply asked if mom working nights was a material change, and if I should be given right to look after child at nights and in mornings? Also, kids don't attend daycare due to mom working. Mom is off work when kids go to daycare.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pursuinghappiness View Post
(Sorry dealing with stupid court action and feeling punchy today).
No worries. I completely understand where your hatred towards dad's come from. I'm not looking to control mom's time and not one of those parents who dictated the type of haircut or what color nail polish other parent puts on child during their parenting time. Just asking simple questions about right of first refusal, and whether parents get precedence over grandparents in family law or vice versa (when both parents are fit).
Reply With Quote
  #27 (permalink)  
Old 10-26-2017, 06:24 PM
blinkandimgone's Avatar
Moderator
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Lucknow
Posts: 5,225
blinkandimgone has a spectacular aura aboutblinkandimgone has a spectacular aura aboutblinkandimgone has a spectacular aura about
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tayken View Post
Hey! Just because you put "ok" before it doesn't mean you are not infringing on my (TM) (C) on "Good luck!". You have been warned!!!!
Take it up with my lawyer!!
Reply With Quote
  #28 (permalink)  
Old 10-26-2017, 06:32 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 2,809
Pursuinghappiness will become famous soon enough
Default

Quote:
No worries. I completely understand where your hatred towards dad's come from. I'm not looking to control mom's time and not one of those parents who dictated the type of haircut or what color nail polish other parent puts on child during their parenting time. Just asking simple questions about right of first refusal, and whether parents get precedence over grandparents in family law or vice versa (when both parents are fit).
lol, I don't hate dads or men...calm down.

You just seem to post a lot of very petty, nit-picky threads trying to gain a tactical advantage over insignificant issues.

Anyway, I'm not trying to inflame you so I'll refrain from any further stupid comments on your multiple posts...apologies.
Reply With Quote
  #29 (permalink)  
Old 10-26-2017, 11:01 PM
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Posts: 1,681
trinton has a little shameless behaviour in the past
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pursuinghappiness View Post
lol, I don't hate dads or men...calm down.
Except for the father of your child right ?


Quote:
Originally Posted by Pursuinghappiness View Post
You just seem to post a lot of very petty, nit-picky threads trying to gain a tactical advantage over insignificant issues.
Those are some really fruitful words that you like to use. I take it you must be a very sweet person. You might think the parents work schedules are insignificant. But all the cases I am coming across contradict your mom made theories.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pursuinghappiness View Post
Anyway, I'm not trying to inflame you so I'll refrain from any further stupid comments on your multiple posts...apologies.
No no, please continue. Here is more judge thoughts for ya.

Quote:
[48] What appears to the Court to be the relevant circumstances today as far as the children’s needs are concerned, in addition to that change of the father work’s schedule, are: i) the young age of the children; ii) the parental capacities of both parents; iii) the close distance from one residence to each other; iv) the stability offered by the mother since the separation and the recent capacity of the father to also offer a stable environment to the children in his present situation at home and at his work; v) the recent improvement of the communication between the parties.

[49] The mother is reluctant to put in place a shared custody but she realizes that the children need to see their father despite what appears to her to be the latter’s relative incapacity to properly take care of them. It is true that she is perhaps somehow protective and this is very understandable. However, she also wants to maximize the contacts between her children and their father since the separation, which are in their interest. She also considers to reorganize his own life, which is also very understandable, as illustrated by her recent new employment. The Court takes also into account the children’s need for stability which they have and was successfully satisfied until now since the separation by their mother on almost a fulltime basis[6].

[52] The Court is of the opinion that the parties should evolve toward eventually a fully shared children custody such as a 7-7 day sequence.

[54] Thus, the Court will order that specific shared custody arrangement, which does not exclude any agreement that may intervene between the parties.
Why don't you tell us more about the relationship you have encouraged between your child and her father at this time? Or does she still not want to see him
Reply With Quote
  #30 (permalink)  
Old 10-27-2017, 12:31 AM
arabian's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Western Canada
Posts: 9,924
arabian will become famous soon enough
Default

I highly recommend that the poster obtain legal advice.

Family law is a serious matter and certainly not trivial. This poster is seeking objective advice and when receives it responds with condescending snarky remarks. We can do without the slide show thank you.

If find Trinton's remarks to be quite objectionable and hope that he stops this "flaming" immediately. Pursuing Happiness is a senior contributor to this forum and is trying to offer her advice and certainly doesn't deserve the disrespect from Trinton.

Enough already!

Last edited by arabian; 10-27-2017 at 12:36 AM.
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


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Parenting plan - Holidays questions baldclub Parenting Issues 15 01-25-2013 11:45 AM
Parental alienation: Cdn. study - 1989-2008 kidsRworthit Parenting Issues 10 11-26-2012 03:24 PM
Ex emotionally abusive towards kids formyGirls Parenting Issues 18 08-23-2011 07:31 PM
Is It Up To The (De Facto) Custodial Parent.. RAAAR Divorce & Family Law 10 06-21-2011 12:05 AM
Custodial parent moving to uk,wants to take child? scottishmaiden Divorce & Family Law 6 10-23-2008 08:39 AM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:52 PM.