Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

settlement conf. and trial mgt. conf. combo

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

  • settlement conf. and trial mgt. conf. combo

    Can anyone provide information in relation this situation? I'm representing myself and would appreciate to hear of your experience. There doesn't seem to many resources to draw on. Thank you.

  • #2
    Unfortunately Family Law Rule 17(7) only mentions that the combined conference can exist. The only mention in Canlii is that the combined conferences are ordered to speed-up cases. Your question also is a very difficult Internet search producing no results other than just references to Rule 17(7).

    Since as the conferences progress, the forms supporting them increase in complexity as there is much more information to deal with, it would be my guess that you would prepare the documents for the most advanced of the combined conferences. In other words, for the combined settlement/trial management conference, prepare the form 17E: Trial Management Conference Brief with all it's wonderful attachments.

    But I would not take this advice to heart without talking to a lawyer or the Family Law Information Centre duty counsel.

    I hoped to be able to help you more on this.

    Good Luck

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by constantmotion View Post
      Can anyone provide information in relation this situation? I'm representing myself and would appreciate to hear of your experience. There doesn't seem to many resources to draw on. Thank you.
      Per Kenny's post... Rule 17.(7) is acted on by the judge hearing the conference. At any time they can assess the situation under the different conference rules. Generally, the only time this happens is when they don't want to bring something on motion (as it already has and not been fully resolved) and they want to expedite things to a fast-track trial.

      I haven't heard of a multi-conference being ordered and/or scheduled ever. Generally, what happens is that if both parties are in agreement on issues they can split the discussion between a settlement conference and other conference. This is a rare situation though.

      Are you scheduled for a mixed conference?

      Good Luck!
      Tayken

      Comment


      • #4
        This does happen usually though, it is because the other side has refused to participate, is MIA or, a summary judgment process is underway. Have you filed the required documents up to this point?

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by SillyMe View Post
          This does happen usually though, it is because the other side has refused to participate, is MIA or, a summary judgment process is underway. Have you filed the required documents up to this point?
          That is the catch all... The conversion is usually done when a party is absent from the hearing. But, it generally takes several attempts for something to be moved to a summary judgement on the matters.

          Be there for any conference and if you can't be. Make sure you reschedule it and notify the other party. Don't screw around with the process or avoid it. It will only come back to haunt you.

          Good Luck!
          Tayken

          Comment


          • #6
            Thanks everyone for your input. Yes, I filed form 17E - my court date is this week. This makes sense as he was contesting info at the trial management conference and the judge ordered the combo. Bought time before the trial. From my research, I (now) realize they were waiting for the Bill 133 amendment which came into effect Jan. 1, 2012.
            I'm assuming because it's partially a settlement conference, each of us will have the opportunity to state our case as the session commences.
            Thank you again, it's much appreciated.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by constantmotion View Post
              Thanks everyone for your input. Yes, I filed form 17E - my court date is this week. This makes sense as he was contesting info at the trial management conference and the judge ordered the combo. Bought time before the trial. From my research, I (now) realize they were waiting for the Bill 133 amendment which came into effect Jan. 1, 2012.
              I'm assuming because it's partially a settlement conference, each of us will have the opportunity to state our case as the session commences.
              Thank you again, it's much appreciated.
              Bill 133 is about pension reform.

              Interesting that you went from a TMC to a mixed SC/TMC. Sounds like you are close on resolving some issues (if not all).

              A lot can be done at a Conference and you have a good judge. At a SC the judge is more interested in hearing "SOLUTIONS" to the "PROBLEMS" not just the "PROBLEMS". So go to the SC with some ideas (be creative) on how the issues in the case can be potentially resolved.

              You may even want to research the solutions on CanLii.org and sight the case law you are using for your solutions.

              Judges hate being presented with problems. They want litigants to be solution oriented. Be the party who comes to the table with solutions. Flapping your arms complaining about the other party's conduct wins you nothing generally.

              Good Luck!
              Tayken

              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