View Single Post
  #7  
Old 05-26-2011, 10:38 PM
fieldgrey fieldgrey is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Ontario
Posts: 147
fieldgrey is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TLCRN View Post
Yes we are self represented after having legal counsel for 9 years and spending way too much in legal fees. I realize it might have been a mistake but at the time everything is so overwhelming especially when dealing with the safety of the children.
There was an issue once as our file was to be transferred as per a Court Order from one jurisdication to another, taking almost a year as the procedure was different from a unified to a non unfied court. That is what we were explained at a Court proceeding.
Humm, that is exactly what is happening with our case as he is remarried and stopped working collecting EI for exactly a year, receiving a subplan from his union, and living off an inheritance, stopping paying CS. Can't figure out how one can pay $2,000 monthly for mortgage payments, plus expenses while collection EI.
Will have to wait and see the decision of the Justice.
Did you and the other party file with the Court "an offer to settle" which is to be opened only after the trial completed?
I was told by an advice lawyer where I reside to request our file to be transferred to your jurisdiction where the children reside close to Oshawa last year; but told by another FLIC where the proceeding have been held the past 10 years NOT to request transfer of the file since we were bound to get a Justice who is familliar with our case; sure enough, the trial Judge has dealt with our case twice in the past, making a "final" Order which has yet to be complied with by the other party.
I do not understand in your case, if you had all documents as proof of change in material, why the other party did not settle? were you both self represented? did Justice make an order for costs even if you were self represented?
You've got a lot of questions mixed with statements, but I'll do what I can. Some of this is opinion, some is procedural.

I can't speak to jurisdictional issues, I don't know anything about them. However, regardless of jurisdiction, the result from motions and trial is always based on the pleadings and evidence of the parties. The courts will not do the work for the litigants. This is what makes self representation so difficult: we have to learn as we are doing. If you've got orders, and they are not complied with, then you have to bring further motions for enforcement. In civil and family matters, compliance and enforcement are up to the litigants (generally speaking).

You've been at this some time and I'm surprised disclosure of income and finances is an issue. In a support claim you should have zero problem getting a disclosure order for NOA, tax filings, banking, RRSP, investing, credit and other statements for at least 3 years. Any justice will sign off on these disclosure basics. If the other party is not complying with disclosure go back for another motion with affidavit about non-compliance. A couple of these in a row will lead to grounds for a contempt order (fines and/or jail time). Again, the court system will not do this work for you - you must be on top of the other party to force compliance.

Now, about my case: my ex made two different pleadings against my motion: 1) I was willfully underemployed, or 2) I was hiding compensation.So, the evidence was not accepted by my ex as sufficient or proof positive. And where it was accepted my ex argued that I was deliberately under employed so I didn't have to pay as much support. As the justice noted at the beginning of trial: 'there is a lot of suspicion between the parties.' In fact when I was cross examined I was challenged on forging employment agreements (after the justice challenged her, she agreed they were authentic). It goes to show that evidence is only sufficient if the other party believes it is - that's why we ended up at trial.

We are both self represented, but my ex had a lawyer for the first 9 months. Because we settled, the court does not do anything but endorse the terms of the settlement. If we had finished a trial, the judge would make a ruling. In that ruling the justice would then address court costs one of 3 ways:
1. declare that each party was responsible for their own costs, or
2. assign costs immediately, or
3. request the parties make submissions on costs to be heard later

In the case of #3, the submissions can include copies of offers to settle to prove that you worked hard to avoid trial and therefore should be entitled to costs.

FG