Ottawa Divorce .com Forums


User CP

New posts

Advertising

  Ottawa Divorce .com Forums > Main Category > Divorce & Family Law

Divorce & Family Law This forum is for discussing any of the legal issues involved in your divorce.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
  #1  
Old 12-22-2018, 09:44 PM
fairlight fairlight is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Posts: 40
fairlight has a little shameless behaviour in the past
Default Naming a co-respondent?

I am counter-filing for divorce on the grounds of adultery and am wondering about naming my husband's mistress. Husband has admitted the adultery (in his application!) and is currently living at his mistress's house, she pays all the bills, he pays no child support and is declaring very little income.

I'm in dire financial straits and need him to help out. No bitterness, just practical realities. Would naming her help me and the children out financially, since she is the sole provider at their house?

I've had some legal advice but can't afford to retain a lawyer so I'm doing it on my own.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 12-22-2018, 10:07 PM
rockscan rockscan is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 6,650
rockscan will become famous soon enoughrockscan will become famous soon enough
Default

Is he claiming hardship?

If he is not then just his income matters. You file for support based on his income. If he is underemployed or purposely not working you go after that.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 12-22-2018, 10:12 PM
kate331 kate331 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Posts: 663
kate331 is on a distinguished road
Default

I believe its No Fault Divorce in Canada, doesn't matter who has an affair, and I don't believe his new partners salary has anything to do with support.

How did you support your family while intact?
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 12-22-2018, 11:24 PM
fairlight fairlight is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Posts: 40
fairlight has a little shameless behaviour in the past
Default

He hasn't claimed hardship at this point. Just an incredibly low income. If he was working minimum wage, he'd make triple what he's claimed.

I had a lump sum payout from an insurance claim years ago. That plus some part-time work is how I've supported the family. But it's almost gone. The family has almost never been intact. He's come and gone the whole marriage. Very irresponsible. And in trouble with the law too.

He's also in debt up to his ears. It's a real mess. Plus on top of it, he keeps dragging me to court over custody/access issues, further depleting all of our resources. It's very destructive.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 12-23-2018, 01:32 AM
kate331 kate331 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Posts: 663
kate331 is on a distinguished road
Default

You can have a minimum wage imputed to him. How old are your children? If you still have some of your insurance settlement, then you probably wont qualify for legal aid, but try anyway.

Depending on when he acquired the debt, you could be on the hook for 1/2 of it, if it was during the marriage.

From my own personal experience and mistakes my advice would be to secure a full-time job asap, and get subsidized daycare (if needed). Dont let him get away with anything less than a 50/50 custody split. My ex too took off for greener pastures, and its been an uphill battle ever since.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 12-23-2018, 11:23 AM
Tayken's Avatar
Tayken Tayken is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 7,465
Tayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant future
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by fairlight View Post
I am counter-filing for divorce on the grounds of adultery and am wondering about naming my husband's mistress.
It isn't worth the time and effort. The "divorce" element of the whole ordeal is mostly symbolic and only for the purposes of getting remarried. (You need it to get remarried.) The major issues are:

1. Custody and access of the children;
2. Child support for the children;
3. Spousal support;
4. Equalization of assets; and finally
5. Divorce.

Focusing on the least important issue to the court first in your filing signals to a judge that you are simply doing it for the "revenge" factor. I would start with the most important issue to resolve first and get that figured out and then go down the list.

Quote:
Originally Posted by fairlight View Post
Husband has admitted the adultery (in his application!) and is currently living at his mistress's house, she pays all the bills, he pays no child support and is declaring very little income.
No one cares about "adultery". Maybe in 1950 people cared but, it is 2018 and what two consenting adults do is of no concern to the court. The court doesn't police who has sex with whom. Sorry to say even mentioning the "adultery" makes you look petty, vengeful and over emotional.

You are better off leaving the whole "adultery" stuff out any court filings and seeking assistance from a counselor to deal with the hurt feelings you have. It is cheaper and won't delay the settlement of your issues. You may also learn something about yourself and feel better too!

Quote:
Originally Posted by fairlight View Post
I'm in dire financial straits and need him to help out.
Those are issues #2 and #3. But, if the other party to the matter makes <60,000 per year you are always going to have "dire financial" issues. Child support and spousal support for any income lower than 250,000 per year won't allow anyone to not work sorry to say. So you shouldn't bet on the other parent to "support you" or even make a reasonable contribution to what you (or the children) need to fully support yourself.

Find employment ASAP is the best advice anyone here can give you.

Quote:
Originally Posted by fairlight View Post
No bitterness, just practical realities. Would naming her to help me and the children out financially since she is the sole provider at their house?
I doubt there is "no bitterness" as you have referred to the other party's common law spouse as a "mistress" and their relationship as "adultery" which are very "bitter" words to use. They are not commonly used in court filings and a good lawyer would scratch those words out of any application and related affidavits etc...

You actually can't name the "mistress" as a party to the matter as they are not a party to the matter. In fact, you send the very wrong signal if you try to have the "mistress" added as a party to the matter. Why?

The "mistress" could counterclaim that you have admitted that they are an "equal" parent to you and the other parent. The only people responsible for paying child support are parents. So, by requesting child support from the "mistress" you are acknowledging that they play the role of an in loco parentis ("acting in place of a parent"). I would not recommend this approach at all. I have seen very skilled lawyers twist this kind of request to chip away at custody and access of the requesting parent.

I would not even bring up the "mistress" at all. I would avoid it at all costs. The dispute is between the actual parents in the matter.

Quote:
Originally Posted by fairlight View Post
I've had some legal advice but can't afford to retain a lawyer so I'm doing it on my own.
I highly recommend you retain a lawyer or at minimum go to the FLIC office in your area and speak to dutey counsel. You are going about this all wrong and are quite transparent in your use of language.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 12-23-2018, 01:50 PM
fairlight fairlight is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Posts: 40
fairlight has a little shameless behaviour in the past
Default

Thank you. I have a documented disability for which I receive benefits, which has prevented me from working full-time. So it is not as simple as "go out and get a job" but I am doing what I can.

Using words like "adultery" and "mistress" is just being honest to the facts. This isn't about my "hurt". That's actually really twisted. But thank you for the heads up as to how that is perceived in court. It's not a focus on my filing at all, just 1-2 points at the very end.

I definitely don't want to damage my case by adding a co-respondent, just don't actually know the legal reasons to do so.

kate331: My children are in elementary school. The debt is from car loans, so I assume he could sell the vehicles and pay a substantial portion of it off, he just chooses not to.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 12-23-2018, 04:47 PM
fairlight fairlight is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Posts: 40
fairlight has a little shameless behaviour in the past
Default

Quote:
I doubt there is "no bitterness" as you have referred to the other party's common law spouse as a "mistress" and their relationship as "adultery" which are very "bitter" words to use.
Sorry, I had to re-read this to catch everything you were saying. The other party does not have a "common law spouse". Where do you see that? Living with the other woman doesn't make you common law or a spouse with them. You have to have lived together for THREE YEARS to be common law, and you can't have two spouses at the same time. Good grief! And if the word "mistress" was so out of style nowadays, as you say "it is 2018", then how come it's plastered all over the news in reference to the Chris Watts case? Sorry, not meaning to get off topic, but come on.

https://shulman.ca/common-law-relati...uples-ontario/
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 12-23-2018, 07:06 PM
arabian's Avatar
arabian arabian is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Western Canada
Posts: 10,697
arabian will become famous soon enough
Default

I filed for divorce, on basis of adultery, intentionally. I wanted to not have to wait a full year for divorce to be finalized. We did not have children of the marriage (son was adult). Aside from that, Tayken is correct, there is not usually much benefit in Canada. Interestingly, in some states in the US it is possible to sue the other woman/man for "Alienation of Affection."

Beware of news stories and articles you read on internet. Best to get legal advice. How long have you been married?

The word "mistress" is actually quite dated in my opinion. (I prefer "skank" but I would not use it anywhere in legal writings). Best not to refer to the 3rd party whatsoever as he/she is not relevant for division of property or child custody.

Your husband may agree to jointly file for reason of adultery. I wouldn't spend too much time debating this though. You live in Ontario so you're going to be caught up in the case conference merry-go-round for a few years anyhow, unless you can settle things quickly.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 12-23-2018, 11:02 PM
Tayken's Avatar
Tayken Tayken is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 7,465
Tayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant future
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by fairlight View Post
Sorry, I had to re-read this to catch everything you were saying. The other party does not have a "common law spouse". Where do you see that? Living with the other woman doesn't make you common law or a spouse with them.
Yes, it can. You even cite the various time frames. Furthermore, in your own article, they cite other ways it can be sped up. It is a loose term and could refer to their filing of taxes if they are living together. If they have a child it could be used as a way to describe their relationship.

Quote:
Originally Posted by fairlight View Post
You have to have lived together for THREE YEARS to be common law, and you can't have two spouses at the same time. Good grief!
Actually, you can live in common law with someone while still "married". The "mistress" has rights to property and if they have kids a bunch of other stuff. Just because someone shacks up with another person does not mean they are not entitled to their rights. Even if that person is married and separated. There are many people before the courts facing two family law proceedings. One from their married partner and another from a common-law partner.

Quote:
Originally Posted by fairlight View Post
And if the word "mistress" was so out of style nowadays, as you say "it is 2018", then how come it's plastered all over the news in reference to the Chris Watts case? Sorry, not meaning to get off topic, but come on.
It is used for sensationalism the same as you are doing. It is quite obvious to seasoned posters.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Respondent failed to respond in 30 day timeframe 416Entrepreneur Divorce & Family Law 5 10-01-2018 10:52 AM
No response from Respondent after Application started magic3 Divorce & Family Law 5 06-25-2018 10:36 PM
No doc been served from Respondent for case conference nick2009 Divorce & Family Law 6 01-22-2010 08:38 PM
is it better to be the respondent or the applicant? 1up Divorce & Family Law 4 12-10-2009 12:51 PM
Am I the Applicant or the Respondent? bg78 Financial Issues 4 12-09-2009 09:35 AM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:22 AM.