Settlement Conference question yet again

[Mother]

So the above mentioned SC is coming up and I am wondering what to expect since the other party made an offer I'd like to call politely "one sided". This party is not willing to compromise or make any changes to their offer.

We are not going to accept it. The question is: can we skip this SC or it's a procedural thing and skipping it is not an option? What is going to be settled if there is nothing agreed upon to begin with? Isn't it just a waste of money and time? Can the judge make any orders or rulings during SC or what is s/he going to do if parties are not in agreement on almost anything? Can family/friend attend SC or it is happening just like CC behind closed doors? Do party need to bring any docs as proof of their case? What's going on there?

[takeontheworld]

I dont believe they can be skipped. Its a process. We didnt agree on anything either. After we were done, the judge suggested both parties go sit together and discuss things. It was a waste of time and money. Our judge ordered it to trial from here.

[Mother]

To go and sit together with the both lawyers present or alone? What did you discuss? How long did it take? Where the judge was at the time?

[takeontheworld]

My ex was not present. He doesnt live in canada and I self rep so it was his lawyer and myself in a room. I basically felt like he was trying to bully me by saying if I didnt take their offer to settle I could have to pay 30 to 40k in costs. His lawyer was not interested in negotiating. I said I was done and left.

[Mother]

Can the SC judge make any rulings and/or orders? What's the point of going there if there is no initial agreement?

[takeontheworld]

Can the SC judge make any rulings and/or orders? What's the point of going there if there is no initial agreement?

I know I was awarded custody at our cc and thats because tge ex agreed I could have custody. The judge stipulated no access. If something is agreed on I assume the judge would make tge order but only if both parties agree.

[takeontheworld]

Youve been studying Oink.

[Serene]

SC are a great way to see what a judge would say or do. However, the SC judge is not the same judge you will get at trial. And remember they only get to see a snippet of what is going on, and if time permits. So their advice or strong recommendation on what the parents should do is often not headed. Meaning the parent that is to gain something is hopeful that what the judge recommends might be a step in the right direction to get the other parent to move on an item, even if just a little bit. While the parent who stands something to lose, even if just a little bit of time or money for instance, is sometimes hopeful that this is just one judge's opinion and unfortunately time is likely on their side since the distance between court appearances is long and drawn out...so each party plays their cards and often right into the hands of the other. Meaning the party that hopes to gain stands hopeful on the sidelines while the other party draws out the status quo to further their position.

Personally, I think the SCs should be premediated to some extent. Meaning someone should be vetting the files to say you better get your sh%t together Father and/or Mother because there is some serious sh%t slinging going on and this isn't going to go over well. Or at the very least you or both of you are not being at all cooperative so you better get your stuff together. Unfortunately, the SCs I've attended are rather glossed over and not a whole lot of thought goes into what the judge says once they leave the courtroom.

For what it is worth. We asked for EXACTLY what the judge recommended in the SC and mom said nope. This was literally minutes after we left the courtroom. C'est la vie huh? We've gotten no where since and we are heading onto a year later and waiting for our trial that is around the corner.

[Mother]

A settlement conference must be held in every case where an answer is filed, except for child protection cases. Trial dates are not provided until after the settlement conference is completed, although they can be scheduled prior under judicial discretion.


The goals of a settlement conference are outlined in Rule 17(5) of the Family Law Rules (O. Reg. 114/99):
(a) exploring the chances of settling the case;
(b) settling or narrowing the issues in dispute;
(c) ensuring disclosure of the relevant evidence;
(c.1) settling or narrowing any issues relating to any expert evidence or reports on which the parties intend to rely at trial;
(d) noting admissions that may simplify the case;
(e) if possible, obtaining a view of how the court might decide the case;
(f) considering any other matter that may help in a quick and just conclusion of the case;
(g) if the case is not settled, identifying the witnesses and other evidence to be presented at trial, estimating the time needed for trial and scheduling the case for trial; and
(h) organizing a trial management conference, or holding one if appropriate
The settlement conference judge provides his or her view of how a trial judge might decide the case, and encourages the parties to explore settlement options. Depending on the case, a settlement conference may be combined with a trial management conference.

A judge has a wide range of orders that they can make at a settlement conference including:

• documentary disclosure
• questioning
• filing of summaries of arguments on a motion
• set time for events
• use of expert witness evidence at trial
• service and filing of expert reports
• affidavit evidence by a witness
• requiring parties to attend mandatory information programs
• requiring parties to attend a subsequent case conferences or settlement conferences with a non-judge
• requiring parties to attend an intake meeting with a court mediation service
• requiring parties to attend a community service or resource
• make a final or temporary order, if notice was provided
• an unopposed order or order on consent
• referring an issue for alternative dispute resolution, on consent

The applicant or the party requesting the settlement conference must serve their conference brief within seven days, and the other side must serve their brief within four. Attendance must be confirmed two days prior using a Form 14C.


Any brief or statements presented in a settlement conference will not be disclosed to another judge unless there is an agreement or order from the conference.

Read more:

Courts of Justice Act - O. Reg. 114/99

What is a settlement conference with a non judge? What CC if CC's are done as first step, before SC? What I am missing now? MIP is done already before CC. I am assuming the SC judge cannot be the same at trial?

How to interpret this: "make a final or temporary order, if notice was provided"? It's like martian language. I need translation. What notice? OMG!!!

[Mother]

Youve been studying Oink.

I will do too.

The only thing: the wording is so complicated and confusing that I am afraid my education will end up here anyway. I have more questions than the answers after reading this legal language.

[Serene]

Oink you have reminded me about the reality of the situation. Thank you. And you are indeed correct in your assessment of what Bill Eddy puts forth.

I am no further ahead but I am humbled just the same. I read somewhere else that the more a spouse pits resources, people, authorities against the other spouse, and the more they continue to make allegations of abuse, theft, etc. speaks more about who THEY are than about the person they profess to have so many issues. I believe it was social worker Gary Direnfield that has an article on this. How true.

What is scary is what the heck happens when they have exhausted all those resources? When there are no more people/persons to listen to their woes and no one will entertain the allegations?

[Rioe]

I am no further ahead but I am humbled just the same. I read somewhere else that the more a spouse pits resources, people, authorities against the other spouse, and the more they continue to make allegations of abuse, theft, etc. speaks more about who THEY are than about the person they profess to have so many issues. I believe it was social worker Gary Direnfield that has an article on this. How true.

What is scary is what the heck happens when they have exhausted all those resources? When there are no more people/persons to listen to their woes and no one will entertain the allegations?

It's one of those "in for a penny, in for a pound" type of things. Once they are committed, even if it's obviously not working, they still can't give up, as admitting defeat strikes too hard at the core of their ego. So they throw more resources at it, even though it may cost more than they hope to gain, because to do otherwise is to admit that they wasted their early money.

When they finally reach the end of the line, they turn into bitter angry people who whine about how the system was biased against them.

[Serene]

Escalation of commitment it is called.

Holy smokes you are right! It's right fighting too.

Do you think judge's easily see this or is it a hit or miss? At the very least I would like to think that their lawyer is giving some mediocre to good advice and they are just too angry to accept it?

[Mother]

Just wanted to post here a lawyer's response with regards to the SC. I thought it may help those who are new/relatively new here (as myself).

"In regards to the preparation for a Settlement Conference it is similar to a Case Conference. In summary, once a Case Conference has taken place, if the judge deems it necessary, he/she can either schedule another case conference or a Settlement (next step) or trial Management Conference (skip Settlement Conference if judge orders). As with the Case Conference, these conferences all take place before the judge and their purpose is similar to that of a Case Conference - to encourage the parties to attempt to settle the matter if possible, and to ascertain the issues that cannot be settled and should go for trial. The judge can make temporary orders at these stages, as with the Case Conference. These orders relate to the establishing of timelines, disclosure, and the narrowing of the issues to plan for trial. As such, at trial management conference, the judge will ask the parties to advise the court of how long their evidence will take. The judge will then work towards scheduling a trial date.

The purpose essentially to move the litigation forward towards trial as a conference is the necessary next court appearance. The only major difference from the Case Conference is, we are required to provide an offer to settle the matter".

[annapurna66]

My understanding of your question is this: for the most part, only orders on consent can be made at CC or SC. In order to do this you must give the other party "notice" of what you intend to ask the judge for and then ask if they agree. Write your "notice" up in your settlement conference brief...there is a place for it near the end of the brief (under what orders are you seeking). It is my understanding that only very procedural orders will be issued at the SC or CC (like a simple child support order or consent for financial disclosure) or those issues that are agreed upon with consent. Trial judge can not be the judge at SC or CC..but you can have same judge for SC or CC (as was in my case).