I had signed an agreement previously in court. During the conferences I was being bullied by O/C and the duty counsel that was to speak with me at the SC simply refused to speak with me and stated to me that he had too many cases that day and could only witness the agreement - and that is exactly what happened - I got no legal advice whatsoever and the duty counsel only signed the witness box.
The order has very little access time and no holiday access whatsoever among other standard clauses that you would in normal circumstances find in a final child custody order.
I have been forced to bring a MTC to overturn the order but need to prove a material change in circumstances which I feel really good about.
I was curious what exactly does it take to prove there was duress and the order was clearly unfair to the parties and to the child - many lawyers and even duty counsel have stated to me that they would under no circumstance allow such an order to be finalized for a client.
The duty counsel is obviously not going to admit to anything and I think that is where the difficulty will be - will that duty counsel need to be brought into the hearing and cross-examined ? The only thing is that he was a duty counsel and not my lawyer - he didn't have an obligation to protect my best interests, from what I understand.
The order has very little access time and no holiday access whatsoever among other standard clauses that you would in normal circumstances find in a final child custody order.
I have been forced to bring a MTC to overturn the order but need to prove a material change in circumstances which I feel really good about.
I was curious what exactly does it take to prove there was duress and the order was clearly unfair to the parties and to the child - many lawyers and even duty counsel have stated to me that they would under no circumstance allow such an order to be finalized for a client.
The duty counsel is obviously not going to admit to anything and I think that is where the difficulty will be - will that duty counsel need to be brought into the hearing and cross-examined ? The only thing is that he was a duty counsel and not my lawyer - he didn't have an obligation to protect my best interests, from what I understand.
Comment