Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Precedent setting DV case

Collapse
This is a sticky topic.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by Stillbreathing View Post
    Thanks Rockscan. Great find. It’s so heartening that this case and the one I originally posted about have come to light. It really does show that judges are finally becoming educated about the consequences of verified domestic violence during divorce proceedings. I have been searching for this type of case since my litigation started 10 years ago. It gives survivors of domestic violence at least some hope that all is not lost when they enter family court. These rulings are long overdue.
    finally?
    This forum is awash with people saying judges removed access (overrode maximum contact) due to domestic violence. It is a go to accusation because it has a long history of working.

    This case doesn't sound that unusual, the person ruled against was a piece of work. I fail to see the "halleluiah finally" unless we are talking about the cash payout and I dont know that that is unique.
    Last edited by pinkHouses; 05-24-2022, 10:44 AM.

    Comment


    • #17
      One of the things I think is outstanding about this case is that not only is this a landmark ruling which will no doubt be used as reference case law in upcoming litigation but it was a self-rep litigant who accomplished this amazing feat! Absolutely inspirational!

      Comment


      • #18
        This is a domestic violence thread not an abuse of court process thread.

        You have no idea about what people on here have suffered. “very surprising if any of it could be used by anyone here” - you have no idea what you’re talking about. Just because we don’t want to share details here doesn’t mean we haven’t suffered horrendous crimes as victims.

        Abuse is not abuse. Being raped and beaten is far worse than having to deal with a crazy ex who is falsely accusing you of stuff.

        Comment


        • #19
          Pretty much. The financial damage caused by my abuse is substantial. I'm not even talking about the emotional toll and the years of therapy I've gone through to deal with the PTS, and not let it affect my job so I can continue to work in a high-stress/high-demand field. What I shared on this forum is a fraction of what was done.

          I was going to come in here to provide my opinion. (is the nice way of saying it).

          But now I'm just going to co-sign the OP on this.

          Shut up about the false accusations. That is not what this thread is about. It's about the fact that there is a ground breaking case which allows the family court process to award damages in a novel way through tort law; that within the marriage- a grievous wrong was committed by one party against another which resulted in damages; and almost more importantly- there is a huge ruling on the punitive damages that can be ordered. I do think this ruling will be challenged and scoped.

          That is not to say that the false accusations don't produce their own trauma. I get it- they do. But what is being discussed here is intimate partner violence in the context of a marriage.
          Last edited by iona6656; 05-24-2022, 05:00 PM.

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by pinkHouses View Post
            This case doesn't sound that unusual, the person ruled against was a piece of work. I fail to see the "halleluiah finally" unless we are talking about the cash payout and I dont know that that is unique.
            It is very unique in the context of family law. To get this type of award- especially the punitive award- you would have to go through a civil case. And seeing as it is most often women who are the victims, with little or no ability to fund both their family case AND their civil case against their former partners- having the ability for family judges to award damages is MAJOR.

            Intimate partner violence- which happens in every context, e.g. committed against the husband in a cisgender marriage; same sex unions, etc- all of them are important and as a society we need to start doing more to recognize this issue and the impact on family court proceedings.

            Comment


            • #21
              At the risk of having this thread closed I think the mods need to step in and do something about the hijacking that has happened. Which is sad because cases like these should be celebrated as examples of change that is needed. Not to mention that the female survivors on this forum who could benefit from knowing these cases get punished further by having these discussions stopped because a small group didn’t like being asked to stop trashing them. Which means that instead of being reprimanded for hijacking a topic unnecessarily, the thread will be closed to further IMPORTANT discussion and case sharing.

              It is ironic that the people accusing the women of male bashing are, in their own posts, female bashing.

              This thread is also an example of why these cases are important—survivors of domestic violence having their trauma acknowledged by the courts and survivors of domestic violence kindly asking that their vindication not be diluted on this forum.

              Comment


              • #22
                Agreed.

                This thread doesn't need to be hijacked with 'whataboutisms'.

                If anyone would like to discuss false accusations or other topics, please make your own thread and discuss it there.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Thanks.

                  Yes, please keep the thread focused on the issue being discussed.

                  I have moved the off topic posts to a separate thread in the forum.

                  I have sticky'd this thread.
                  Ottawa Divorce

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Ok. But what certainly is not off topic is the insinuation (directly implied by example of a man being a victim because another man did the violence) that only men commit violence and it isn't all physical.
                    The definition of violence in Family Law is different. So also watch what you say to avoid being caught up in it.
                    I also think that this was an extreme case and only time will tell if this gets applied to cases more in the norm.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Not one person has said or implied only men are abusers.

                      Stop trying to minimize the importance of this case, and devalue the accomplishment of the self repped mother.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        I think allowing the mother to bring a tort claim under the umbrella of family litigation and making this monumental ruling, the judge is sending a strong message that:
                        1. Domestic Violence is real and does exist in all its ugliness
                        2. Society and the courts will no longer tolerate intimate partner abuse
                        3. If you are an abuser, beware because the court is willing to impose serious financial consequences against you
                        4. Domestic abuse is not a victimless crime and victims should be compensated

                        I also feel this case may help in other ways as well. My lawyer discouraged me from focusing too much attention on the domestic abuse during the marriage or litigation. They felt that given the current court atmosphere it would be best to use other arguments to advance my case.
                        The aforementioned case may now give lawyers ammunition to bring to light domestic violence suffered by their clients versus shying away from it!

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by Stillbreathing View Post
                          I think allowing the mother to bring a tort claim under the umbrella of family litigation and making this monumental ruling, the judge is sending a strong message that:
                          1. Domestic Violence is real and does exist in all its ugliness
                          2. Society and the courts will no longer tolerate intimate partner abuse
                          3. If you are an abuser, beware because the court is willing to impose serious financial consequences against you
                          4. Domestic abuse is not a victimless crime and victims should be compensated

                          I also feel this case may help in other ways as well. My lawyer discouraged me from focusing too much attention on the domestic abuse during the marriage or litigation. They felt that given the current court atmosphere it would be best to use other arguments to advance my case.
                          The aforementioned case may now give lawyers ammunition to bring to light domestic violence suffered by their clients versus shying away from it!
                          I think many, many people have been discouraged from adding any focus on DV in their cases for a very long time, especially when there are kids involved. Keeping the focus on the kids is important, however having recourse for DV is equally important.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by blinkandimgone View Post

                            Stop trying to minimize the importance of this case, and devalue the accomplishment of the self repped mother.
                            You just made that up.
                            Never did I devalue the accomplishments of the self-repped LITTIGANT. I don't understand why them being a mother is important here.

                            Originally posted by blinkandimgone View Post
                            Not one person has said or implied only men are abusers.
                            It is like this board has its own personal definition of DV; Family Law be damned.

                            Here there is the acknowledgement that men can be abused if another man does it. Implication by exclusion.

                            Why not say be more inclusive and quicker by saying "Intimate partner violence can be committed by any one partner against the other, period":

                            Originally posted by iona6656 View Post
                            Intimate partner violence- which happens in every context, e.g. committed against the husband in a cisgender marriage; same sex unions, etc- all of them are important and as a society we need to start doing more to recognize this issue and the impact on family court proceedings.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Neither this thread nor this case are about defining DV to suit a particular person, or male vs female abusers.

                              If you don't have anything of value to add to the original topic, please take those comments to a thread dedicated to those topics.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                I don't see this as amazing, and certainly not a reason to go back to record more abuse which will always come as a perceived setup. This family court IPV acknowledgment is nothing more than a money grab while you still 50/50 coparent with this person.

                                IMO, criminal court and protective orders are available. If you decide to forgive and stay with them, asking for money later does nothing. Family court has always dealt with abuse, so I don't see a payout making it better.

                                It was hard, but I could understand paying my ex ss along with the equalization payment. To turn around and take that money back for how my ex treated me throughout the marriage, although glorifying would make no sense.

                                Unless you're dealing with someone wealthy, I don't see this going far and wide. Does a slap from RS cost more than Blink? Physical vs emotional, rich vs poor, old vs young, male vs female, disabled vs able-bodied? Most of the items Iona mentioned would be covered under a ss claim; and I could understand the tort claim against CAS/accuser. But a spouse... I see this going really bad. I'd rather get my cost awarded.

                                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