History:
Kids are both toddlers and I was stay-at-home with bits of work on the side.
Broke up. When I found a rental, X launched Family Case without notice and removed kids from my care. Allegations galore. Got minimal supervised access that X interfered with consistently while investigations were underway.
Case:
Crown: charge withdrawn
CAS Investigation: in my favour, concerned about parental alienation
OCL Investigation: fully in my favour, concerned about financial motive and malicious intent
My collaterals were all professionals and a few were supervisors for access.
X's collaterals were his friends / family whom have had limited contact with me.
X's allegations all found false in all reports.
X got scared and consented to lift supervision from access, consented to 50% time share provided I did not proceed to court with the reports. I took it. I wanted my kids back asap.
X wants to settle all matters quickly. Offers are exchanged.
Threatens to file a Dispute of OCL Report if I didn't accept his financial Offer and equal share parenting plan, against judge's direction. X hasn't waited for latest counter Offers.
Disputed Report(s) on last possible day.
Questions:
1) What should I expect from X's Dispute?
2) X wants to "communicate" almost daily now which has been very difficult. Suggestions welcome to keep the interaction "short and sweet."
3) What can I do about the current interim custody order? X is disputing the OCL Report which wouldn't be useful until Trial anyway. I don't want to go to Trial but feel he created a new status quo with false allegations / misrepresentation that is considered child abuse:
Izyuk v. Blousov, 2011 ONSC 6451 (CanLII)
CanLII - 2011 ONSC 6451 (CanLII)
418. Creating a favourable status quo through falsehood and misrepresentations is not just a matter of litigation strategy: It is often tantamount to child abuse. It goes to the heart of “best interests” considerations; Parental judgement; The ability to sacrifice self-interest for the sake of the child; Awareness of the child’s need to have maximum contact with both parents.
419. If past behaviour is a predictor of the future, assessors and courts have an obligation to address – and seriously sanction – common and predictable strategic behaviours intended to create an inappropriate status quo.
Kids are both toddlers and I was stay-at-home with bits of work on the side.
Broke up. When I found a rental, X launched Family Case without notice and removed kids from my care. Allegations galore. Got minimal supervised access that X interfered with consistently while investigations were underway.
Case:
Crown: charge withdrawn
CAS Investigation: in my favour, concerned about parental alienation
OCL Investigation: fully in my favour, concerned about financial motive and malicious intent
My collaterals were all professionals and a few were supervisors for access.
X's collaterals were his friends / family whom have had limited contact with me.
X's allegations all found false in all reports.
X got scared and consented to lift supervision from access, consented to 50% time share provided I did not proceed to court with the reports. I took it. I wanted my kids back asap.
X wants to settle all matters quickly. Offers are exchanged.
Threatens to file a Dispute of OCL Report if I didn't accept his financial Offer and equal share parenting plan, against judge's direction. X hasn't waited for latest counter Offers.
Disputed Report(s) on last possible day.
Questions:
1) What should I expect from X's Dispute?
2) X wants to "communicate" almost daily now which has been very difficult. Suggestions welcome to keep the interaction "short and sweet."
3) What can I do about the current interim custody order? X is disputing the OCL Report which wouldn't be useful until Trial anyway. I don't want to go to Trial but feel he created a new status quo with false allegations / misrepresentation that is considered child abuse:
Izyuk v. Blousov, 2011 ONSC 6451 (CanLII)
CanLII - 2011 ONSC 6451 (CanLII)
418. Creating a favourable status quo through falsehood and misrepresentations is not just a matter of litigation strategy: It is often tantamount to child abuse. It goes to the heart of “best interests” considerations; Parental judgement; The ability to sacrifice self-interest for the sake of the child; Awareness of the child’s need to have maximum contact with both parents.
419. If past behaviour is a predictor of the future, assessors and courts have an obligation to address – and seriously sanction – common and predictable strategic behaviours intended to create an inappropriate status quo.
Comment