Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

christmas and new year's holidays

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    I will guess and say nofrills ex will do this type of thing over and over again. Having phone conversations lets them keep a grip on you.

    This was a temper tantrum and they purposely wanted you to spend money as punishment for your non-compliance.
    With experience comes wisdom. Janus said it well and it could be repeated to the ex "what does the court order say?" or ignore them.

    Family death, a wedding they count for urgent motions.
    Grandma being in town only for one day doesn't.

    Comment


    • #17
      Something I just found.


      Mackie v. Crowther, 2019 ONSC 6431 (CanLII)

      After separating, the parents of a 9-year-old girl agreed to joint custody, with primary residence to the mother and access to the father. The girl was actively involved in hockey, and had two weekend tournaments coming up.

      By coincidence, the first fell on the mother’s weekend; the second fell on the father’s. However, the father unilaterally decided that he wanted to take their daughter to the first tournament. He sent an email to this effect, and even has his lawyer send a letter to the mother’s lawyer, essentially presenting his decision as a “done deal” – i.e. essentially a demand.

      This necessitated a trip to court, and while the parents ultimately agreed that the mother would take the child to the first tournament as scheduled (with the court finding no evidence to justify it should ever have been in doubt), the mother asked for police help in enforcing the consent order.


      ​The court began by admonishing the father – and his lawyer – for making what he called a “request” but which was really a heavy-handed demand.

      the father was forced to promise to the court that he would return the child as scheduled after this Thursday night access, failing which he would automatically have his access to her suspended until further notice. Plus, in light of what it called his “outrageous” behaviour, the court also slapped the father with $3,000 in costs for the motion, adding:

      Unreasonable parents need to understand that hard-ball tactics can backfire in a very expensive way.

      The court ended by saying:

      I wish to make it clear to both of these parents that I am trying to send a very strong signal. Don’t engage in hard-ball tactics when it comes to parenting issues.

      Comment

      Our Divorce Forums
      Forums dedicated to helping people all across Canada get through the separation and divorce process, with discussions about legal issues, parenting issues, financial issues and more.
      Working...
      X