responding to a form 14 notice of motion

[staysingle]

Can anyone inform me of the proper form to use in responding mto a form 14 notice of motion.

Thanks

[Tayken]

Can anyone inform me of the proper form to use in responding mto a form 14 notice of motion.

Thanks

Form 14 is what you would use if you want to "cross motion" the motion brought forward and request relief from the court.

"Form 14: Notice of Cross Motion"

You need to submit a responding affidavit to the Notice of Motion you received and you can include in your responding affidavit the evidence in support of your cross motion.

Just make sure in your affidavit you clearly identify what you are responding to from the other affidavit and what is evidence in support of your cross motion.

Good Luck!
Tayken

[staysingle]

Thanks Tayken,

This is a bit of a strange filing. She filed both a form 14 notice of motion (Emergency/ex parte) along with a form 15 motion to change. The form 14 emergency route was heard by a judge ( without my knowledge) and she said this she wouldn't rule without my response and sent the adjourned the matter to a DRO. Two weeks later the DRO ruled this should follow the normal route ( mediation/mandatory Information Program/first appearance , etc.) Incredibly the same DRO judge sent the matter back to the original judge to argue the form 14 route in essence reestablishing the form 14 emergency motion. Two lawyers are very confused, on the one hand it was ruled this is not an emergency motion and on the other it is being heard as a stand alone emergency hearing. The hearing is this Monday.

I went ahead and responded with a form 14b asking for an order to dismiss this motion pursuant to Rule. 14 (4) and (4.2) as the conditions of this rule have not been met. My thinking is this is a procedural issue! Any thoughts?

[Tayken]

Thanks Tayken,

This is a bit of a strange filing. She filed both a form 14 notice of motion (Emergency/ex parte) along with a form 15 motion to change. The form 14 emergency route was heard by a judge ( without my knowledge) and she said this she wouldn't rule without my response and sent the adjourned the matter to a DRO. Two weeks later the DRO ruled this should follow the normal route ( mediation/mandatory Information Program/first appearance , etc.) Incredibly the same DRO judge sent the matter back to the original judge to argue the form 14 route in essence reestablishing the form 14 emergency motion. Two lawyers are very confused, on the one hand it was ruled this is not an emergency motion and on the other it is being heard as a stand alone emergency hearing. The hearing is this Monday.

I went ahead and responded with a form 14b asking for an order to dismiss this motion pursuant to Rule. 14 (4) and (4.2) as the conditions of this rule have not been met. My thinking is this is a procedural issue! Any thoughts?

That is actually a good way to handle the situation in accordance with the Rules. Emergency ex-parte motions are not to be miss used. The fact that the other party did this and it was refused to be heard on this basis doesn't bode well for the other parent.

Grab a copy of Justice Brownstone's book "Tug of War". Justice Brownstone writes specifically from a judicial point of view on the miss use of emergency ex-parte motions and what could result from miss using this very complex area of law.

It is good to hear that the judges involved in the matter did not supersede your rights under the Charter to hear this motion. Attempting to miss lead a justice like this and attempting to remove your rights under the Charter to a fair hearing is a serious thing to do.

I will put together some additional information on emergency ex-parte motions, their requirements for filing and resulting case law against parties who have miss used this very complex area of Family Law.

The application will probably stick but, you have great cogent and relevant evidence on the other parties miss conduct. As the matter continues through the normal process the Justices you will appear before will not be impressed, to say the least, at the conduct already on your file.

Good Luck!
Tayken