Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Self Representation - Feedback

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Mess - Brilliant! I needed to hear that. And in looking back at our court papers, that is all we have really discussed thus far. And in fact, we continue to say that the children deserve both parents. Perhaps this will need to be adjusted as time goes on if mom keeps interfering - denying and tagging along to dad's access.

    I need more of this. I have done a lot of research on canlii and found cases that apply, are in same province and are recent. One is VERY much the same. In fact, the judge said that the status quo for access should not be maintained if it is not in the child's best interests... and I think this is the issue. What is happening with access is not what is supposed to happen with the access (dad should be getting more and unfettered per the SA) so at the very least she would have to prove why dad shouldn't see his children and why she needs to interfere with it. Thus far, she hasn't been successful. The judge and CAS had strong words with her, which of course, fell on deaf ears...

    Comment


    • #17
      Iceberg, now you have me worried! We are well educated, but of course, not in law. Really, you didn't understand what the other lawyer said? Because it was a bunch of legal jargon?

      I did represent someone about 15 years ago. But the laws were different then and judges made decisions at most every court date. They at least told you - YOU do it, or I do it now kinda thing...

      I just can't fathom going into debt for this any more than we have. The climates at our employment is going down and I'm worried we will be laid off like the rest of them. We have to keep our nose above water so to speak. And we've already depleted one kid's education fund... this is not at all ideal...

      Keep the advice coming!

      Comment


      • #18
        I have done a lot of research on canlii and found cases that apply, are in same province and are recent.
        You have not done enough preparation.

        There are three aspects to the court system:
        1 - Evidence;
        2 - The law; and
        3 - How 2 applies to 1.

        You must prove everything you are relying upon in 1 if the other side does not admit it. That is a long and detailed process. You also must address evidence brought by the other side, and have contingencies in the event certain facts are not proved.

        For 2, that is your research on CanLII.

        The hardest part is 3. These are your arguments; what you practice in front of the mirror every night for a month, while someone familiar with 1 and 2 interrupts you and asks you questions about parts you spoke on 5 minutes ago and parts you will get to in 20 minutes.

        As a rule of thumb, a lawyer spends two days preparing for every day in court. They have practice; you do not. Prepare very far in advance, and as thoroughly as possible.

        Comment


        • #19
          Thank you OrleansLawyer. Here is a little more info:

          Evidence is easy. Everything is in writing. Mom was silly enough to email us everything and I mean everything. Every email is toxic and foul. She threatens, she even is kind enough to email us 3 minutes before she refuses to give us access and says "just because I feel like it"... CAS could not believe how much she put in writing. That should cover #1. You will never find one foul or even remotely emotional email from us to her. Never.

          For number 2 I think it may be simpler that with some cases. There are no clinical issues. The OCL and an assessment was refuted thus far and we are scheduled for trial already. That is our next court appearance.

          We have also always maintained that the best interests of the children are to have unfettered, equal and ample access to both parents. Both parents should continue to have joint custody. We even have suggested a parrellel parenting regime since mom just refuses to cooperate on most things (and that really means everything). She on the other hand is trying to say that dad is not a good influence on the kids although EVERY avenue that she has tried has not proven to work in her favour. There have been no consequences yet, but no one has believed her and while we have to jump through hoops to overcome stuff, we have been able to continue to hold our head up high.

          One particular case is very similar:
          Izyuk v. Bilousov, 2011 ONSC 6451 (CanLII)



          Please keep the advice coming! I really appreciate it!

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by Serene View Post
            Thank you OrleansLawyer. Here is a little more info:

            Evidence is easy. Everything is in writing. Mom was silly enough to email us everything and I mean everything. Every email is toxic and foul. She threatens, she even is kind enough to email us 3 minutes before she refuses to give us access and says "just because I feel like it"... CAS could not believe how much she put in writing. That should cover #1. You will never find one foul or even remotely emotional email from us to her. Never.

            For number 2 I think it may be simpler that with some cases. There are no clinical issues. The OCL and an assessment was refuted thus far and we are scheduled for trial already. That is our next court appearance.

            We have also always maintained that the best interests of the children are to have unfettered, equal and ample access to both parents. Both parents should continue to have joint custody. We even have suggested a parrellel parenting regime since mom just refuses to cooperate on most things (and that really means everything). She on the other hand is trying to say that dad is not a good influence on the kids although EVERY avenue that she has tried has not proven to work in her favour. There have been no consequences yet, but no one has believed her and while we have to jump through hoops to overcome stuff, we have been able to continue to hold our head up high.

            One particular case is very similar:
            Izyuk v. Bilousov, 2011 ONSC 6451 (CanLII)



            Please keep the advice coming! I really appreciate it!
            In what part it is very similar? I was under impression that in that case Dad did all research and preparation for the trial himself (including posting and asking questions on forum).

            BTW it better to refer the case by link like this 2011 ONSC 6451 (CanLII)

            WD

            Comment


            • #21
              WorkingDad - I will ensure I post with the link. Sorry!

              The issues surrounding the child are very similar.

              For instance: The respondent focused on the child, and his very specific concerns about the child's past and future. The mother continuously said that the child should not spend time with the father, painted dad as an individual reluctant to spend time with his child and shirked his financial responsibilities, etc.

              One point that is eerily similar is saying that dad didn't attend certain things like medical appointments. Yet mom didn't tell him when they were. In fact, she intentionally did NOT apprise him of these dates to ensure that he could not attend...

              And the whole issues surrounding the "status quo". Specifically, that the status quo should not be maintained if it were not in the best interests of the child. Paras 485 and 486 sum it up nicely.

              Para 496 also is applicable.

              He did represent himself but I meant to draw the parrelell to the facts of the case. She also wrote emotionally charged and negative emails and that cast her in a very bad light. We have hundreds, and I mean hundreds of emails that would make your head spin. Normal and intelligent people don't write that stuff down! Really, they might say it on the phone if they had a weak moment, but they wouldn't dare incriminate themselves so often in emails with this stuff. And we aren't talking about petty little things, we are talking about absolute disregard for the law, the children, etc. The emails show no morals or values so to speak...Again, this is how we overcame the allegations with CAS in an instant....

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by Serene View Post
                WorkingDad - I will ensure I post with the link. Sorry!

                The issues surrounding the child are very similar.

                For instance: The respondent focused on the child, and his very specific concerns about the child's past and future. The mother continuously said that the child should not spend time with the father, painted dad as an individual reluctant to spend time with his child and shirked his financial responsibilities, etc.

                One point that is eerily similar is saying that dad didn't attend certain things like medical appointments. Yet mom didn't tell him when they were. In fact, she intentionally did NOT apprise him of these dates to ensure that he could not attend...

                And the whole issues surrounding the "status quo". Specifically, that the status quo should not be maintained if it were not in the best interests of the child. Paras 485 and 486 sum it up nicely.

                Para 496 also is applicable.

                He did represent himself but I meant to draw the parrelell to the facts of the case. She also wrote emotionally charged and negative emails and that cast her in a very bad light. We have hundreds, and I mean hundreds of emails that would make your head spin. Normal and intelligent people don't write that stuff down! Really, they might say it on the phone if they had a weak moment, but they wouldn't dare incriminate themselves so often in emails with this stuff. And we aren't talking about petty little things, we are talking about absolute disregard for the law, the children, etc. The emails show no morals or values so to speak...Again, this is how we overcame the allegations with CAS in an instant....
                So are you going to represent Dad during the trial ?

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by WorkingDAD View Post
                  I was under impression that in that case Dad did all research and preparation for the trial himself (including posting and asking questions on forum).
                  WD
                  You're turning into Jimmy!

                  Apologies for the derailment, but it was all I could think of after reading your reply.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    It would have been an even bigger cake-walk for me if my ex's g/f had represented him in court.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      No, I think he will represent himself.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        That's good. A lawyer is an "officer of the court" and when presenting arguments the judge can safely assume that the lawyer is presenting evidence and arguments in conjunction with the rules of court. A person who self-represents is generally treated respectfully by the judge if the facts are presented properly and rules of court adhered to. Those who self-represent successfully are adept at presenting fact-based evidence, have researched the court process and respect the court rules.

                        When my ex brought the g/f to court with him one time, requesting she sit beside him (when he did an unsuccessful stint of self-representation). The judge calmly said "no" and went on to say that he had filed the motion and should know his issues well enough without coaching. My ex looked pretty stupid and "whipped." It didn't bode well for him. As expected, his motion was dismissed.

                        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