If a judge states no parent is to take the child out of the province...
- Thread starter danzuchy
- Start date
- Status
Is the "hand-written decree" (I believe you're talking about the minutes of settlement) signed by both parties and endorsed by the judge?
If so, then it's like a rough draft of the court order. The actual 'good copy' is being made to reflect the minutes of settlement word-for-word.
It is my belief that your ex can go against the order if she so chooses. She can take the children to BC without any repercussions... unless you choose to file a notice for contempt motion (form 31: http://www.ontariocourtforms.on.ca/forms/family/31/FLR_31_Sept105_ODA.pdf) explaining to the judge why and how your ex is in contempt of the court order. If this is the course you wish to take, you will need to contact the courthouse and ask the court clerk to schedule a court date to hear your case. Once you have the date, you fill out the form, serve it on your ex, file it (along with your affidavit of service) with the court, and leave it in the hands of the judge on the day of your court hearing.
If you don't mind me asking... what is the reason behind the judge order that neither parent shall take the child out of the province? And what is your reason for preventing the trip? (You will need to have very good reasons - with proof - as to why your ex should not take the children out of Ontario.)
If so, then it's like a rough draft of the court order. The actual 'good copy' is being made to reflect the minutes of settlement word-for-word.
It is my belief that your ex can go against the order if she so chooses. She can take the children to BC without any repercussions... unless you choose to file a notice for contempt motion (form 31: http://www.ontariocourtforms.on.ca/forms/family/31/FLR_31_Sept105_ODA.pdf) explaining to the judge why and how your ex is in contempt of the court order. If this is the course you wish to take, you will need to contact the courthouse and ask the court clerk to schedule a court date to hear your case. Once you have the date, you fill out the form, serve it on your ex, file it (along with your affidavit of service) with the court, and leave it in the hands of the judge on the day of your court hearing.
If you don't mind me asking... what is the reason behind the judge order that neither parent shall take the child out of the province? And what is your reason for preventing the trip? (You will need to have very good reasons - with proof - as to why your ex should not take the children out of Ontario.)
I agree with #1, I would just add that if the handwritten order has not been typed into a "good copy" and filed with the court, it is not really in effect. However if you into court again (this could be an interim order made at a case conference for example) the judge will be really really pissed.
I'm not too sure that it's not in effect until you have a signed and sealed copy. Either way, the signed and sealed copy will be dated the same date as the minutes of settlement.
I'd inquire with the court house about that.
Either way, you can always wait until you have the good copy on hand before you file your notice for contempt motion.
dadtotheend
New member
Our minutes of settlement were dated in May but the final order that emerged from those minutes (exactly word for word) was dated a month later in June. It is the June date that is relevant.
That's interesting. I wonder why that is. All our court orders (signed and sealed temp and final) depict the date we were in court... the date on the minutes of settlement. Even though the good copies were issued loooong after the court date.
It wasn't done at a case conference. It was as a result of an emergency order to prevent her family from taking the children to the States. The Judge said no one is to take the children out of the province until custody is settled.
dadtotheend
New member
I think it was because the judge left for the day and we sorted out the settlement in court hallway for an hour or so. I'll bet the minutes were left on her desk and she didn't bother to endorse it for a month afterwards because she was so busy.
billiechic
New member
If it is an emergency order then the judge felt it was a real enough possibility to issue it. You should be having a review of that emergency order quite soon after it was issued though. Has this happened? Emergency orders are not meant to be permanent, they are temporary to allow the other party a chance to speak.
What is her reason to take the kids to BC? Where does her family live in the States? How close is it to where she says she is going? The answers to these questions are important to decide whether it is worth filing the contempt charge.
Tread carefully. That clause is pretty standard when either parent is a citizen of another country. Having it written in a court order does not imply that the parent would necessarily do it, it is a precaution. If she has been planning this trip for a while, and it does not allow her easier access to the States and particularly her family , then it is going to look like you wanted to stop the trip for reasons other than child safety. Unless you are fairly certian her intentions are to leave the country then YOU might be the one to get a tongue lashing from the judge.
What is her reason to take the kids to BC? Where does her family live in the States? How close is it to where she says she is going? The answers to these questions are important to decide whether it is worth filing the contempt charge.
Tread carefully. That clause is pretty standard when either parent is a citizen of another country. Having it written in a court order does not imply that the parent would necessarily do it, it is a precaution. If she has been planning this trip for a while, and it does not allow her easier access to the States and particularly her family , then it is going to look like you wanted to stop the trip for reasons other than child safety. Unless you are fairly certian her intentions are to leave the country then YOU might be the one to get a tongue lashing from the judge.
Police Enforecement Clause
Police Enforecement Clause
A Police Enforcement Clause is handy because you do not have to trust each other..
My former spouse was worried about me taking the kids out of country, I was worried about her trying to stay in Ontario.
Adding a Police Enforement Order allowed us both the comfort that something could be done if the other parent did not come back.
Police Enforecement Clause
A Police Enforcement Clause is handy because you do not have to trust each other..
My former spouse was worried about me taking the kids out of country, I was worried about her trying to stay in Ontario.
Adding a Police Enforement Order allowed us both the comfort that something could be done if the other parent did not come back.
What is this "police enforcement order"? I searched it but couldn't find it in other threads?
Thanks!
Police Enforcement Order
Police Enforcement Order
My Children's mother wanted to go on a trip to Ontario, and my parents wanted to take my three kids and I to Cuba for a vacation.
The kids mom would not consent to passports, indicating that she was afraid I would go to Cuba and never come back.. In typical immature fashion, my lawyer told me not to consent to the Ontario trip until she consented to Cuba..
Like the two immature brats we were at the time, we went to court over it...
After her lawyer argued that I was a "Flight Risk" the judge said she would either consent or he would forgo her consent for me to go...
Shortly after when her lawyer suggested that we close the matter of her trip to Ontario, my lawyer suggested a Police Enforcement Order...Her lawyer argued the point for five minutes until the judge said "stop"... He informed her that he was highly concerned that they would be so sure about me abducting the kids and yet would not consent to the PEO.
He expalined to both of us that he was adding a Police Enforcement Order to our Interim Custody Order.. And that it meant of either of us violated our Interim Order in any way, that the other would just have to call the police and they would be obligated to enforce the order..
The alternative would be like this.. if she went to Ontario and did'nt come back, It could take me years to get the kids back.... Forget about the high horse view people have about abduction.. Women from my home town have "escaped" to BC and Ontario and forced the fathers into years of litigation.. If the province they go to is protective of the sanctity of Motherhood (Like BC and Ontario) the kids may not come back at all.
With the PEO the Police are obligated to act, despite any preconceived notions.
Police Enforcement Order
My Children's mother wanted to go on a trip to Ontario, and my parents wanted to take my three kids and I to Cuba for a vacation.
The kids mom would not consent to passports, indicating that she was afraid I would go to Cuba and never come back.. In typical immature fashion, my lawyer told me not to consent to the Ontario trip until she consented to Cuba..
Like the two immature brats we were at the time, we went to court over it...
After her lawyer argued that I was a "Flight Risk" the judge said she would either consent or he would forgo her consent for me to go...
Shortly after when her lawyer suggested that we close the matter of her trip to Ontario, my lawyer suggested a Police Enforcement Order...Her lawyer argued the point for five minutes until the judge said "stop"... He informed her that he was highly concerned that they would be so sure about me abducting the kids and yet would not consent to the PEO.
He expalined to both of us that he was adding a Police Enforcement Order to our Interim Custody Order.. And that it meant of either of us violated our Interim Order in any way, that the other would just have to call the police and they would be obligated to enforce the order..
The alternative would be like this.. if she went to Ontario and did'nt come back, It could take me years to get the kids back.... Forget about the high horse view people have about abduction.. Women from my home town have "escaped" to BC and Ontario and forced the fathers into years of litigation.. If the province they go to is protective of the sanctity of Motherhood (Like BC and Ontario) the kids may not come back at all.
With the PEO the Police are obligated to act, despite any preconceived notions.
Wow, that's pretty interesting, epinecone. I've never heard of a PEO before but I'm glad to hear they exist. Either way, in our court order it says that either parent must consent to a holiday outside Canada at the other parent's request and must return by the date indicated on the consent letter.
Thankfully, my stepson has been on countless trips with us as well as with his mother, and we've never had any problems. (With the exception of his mother refusing to provide us with his passport one time because she felt we should pay her to use it... which we took to court and had a judge order that the passport would be shared between the parties at the party's request.)
Thankfully, my stepson has been on countless trips with us as well as with his mother, and we've never had any problems. (With the exception of his mother refusing to provide us with his passport one time because she felt we should pay her to use it... which we took to court and had a judge order that the passport would be shared between the parties at the party's request.)
What is the reason for the trip to British Columbia? Is it vacation? Are you thinking she is not planning on returning your children to Ontario? Why do you not want them to go?
The reason I ask is that my ex tried to stop my family from going on vacation to Mexico and the Judge would not even consider her arguments (my ex thought the vacation was inappropriate as I planned to travel with my new spouse and extended family). The Judge gave us a court order to travel with my son without his mother's permission.
Travel is normally considered in the best interests of your children, especially when they are going to see extended family.
The reason I ask is that my ex tried to stop my family from going on vacation to Mexico and the Judge would not even consider her arguments (my ex thought the vacation was inappropriate as I planned to travel with my new spouse and extended family). The Judge gave us a court order to travel with my son without his mother's permission.
Travel is normally considered in the best interests of your children, especially when they are going to see extended family.
It is wise to be cautious..
It is wise to be cautious..
When someone is taking the kids out of province, their is always some risk they won't come back.
Because the legal process in the case of child abduction can be complex, it is probably a concern of many parents.
Much like the original post, my childrens mother wanted to visit her family across the country (in Ontario). Which is great, no matter how I feel about them it does not change the fact they are part of the kids family. However, she had also previously made it clear to me that she intended to move to Ontario with the kids...And would so so at any cost..
When my Lawyer explained to me that all the kids mom would have to do is go to Ontario, claim she or the children were abused, and it would take potentially years to litigate the childrens return.. Not to mention the legal fees..
That is why my lawyer brought forward the Police Enforcement Order, She said in the case the kids mom did not come back.. any police force nationally is obligated to treat the kids mom as a child abductor.
My situation might be a little more intense, because the kids mom has a college diploma in abused womens advocacy, and worked for several years at shelters around the GTA. All of that time around well balanced people helped her develop the belief that men are not a requirement in childrens lives.
It is wise to be cautious..
When someone is taking the kids out of province, their is always some risk they won't come back.
Because the legal process in the case of child abduction can be complex, it is probably a concern of many parents.
Much like the original post, my childrens mother wanted to visit her family across the country (in Ontario). Which is great, no matter how I feel about them it does not change the fact they are part of the kids family. However, she had also previously made it clear to me that she intended to move to Ontario with the kids...And would so so at any cost..
When my Lawyer explained to me that all the kids mom would have to do is go to Ontario, claim she or the children were abused, and it would take potentially years to litigate the childrens return.. Not to mention the legal fees..
That is why my lawyer brought forward the Police Enforcement Order, She said in the case the kids mom did not come back.. any police force nationally is obligated to treat the kids mom as a child abductor.
My situation might be a little more intense, because the kids mom has a college diploma in abused womens advocacy, and worked for several years at shelters around the GTA. All of that time around well balanced people helped her develop the belief that men are not a requirement in childrens lives.
Link...
Link...
Seems this link is specific to Alberta... but this has to exist in the rest of the country..
http://www.albertacourts.ab.ca/qb/notices/ConsolidatedNoticestotheProfessionSept2004.pdf
The relevant section is under Family number 6:
[FONT=Arial,Bold][FONT=Arial,Bold]
http://www.albertacourts.ab.ca/qb/notices/ConsolidatedNoticestotheProfesionSept2004.pdf
Link...
Seems this link is specific to Alberta... but this has to exist in the rest of the country..
http://www.albertacourts.ab.ca/qb/notices/ConsolidatedNoticestotheProfessionSept2004.pdf
The relevant section is under Family number 6:
[FONT=Arial,Bold][FONT=Arial,Bold]
POLICE ENFORCEMENT/ASSISTANCE CLAUSE
[/FONT]
[/FONT]8
After consultation with the Police Services in both Edmonton and Calgary, the Court of Queen’s Bench has developed a standard form police enforcement clause that may be used in family law matters other than restraining orders. The clause presently mandated
for restraining orders will remain the same but the following clause will be used in other matters:
If either of the parties or any other person on their behalf, breaches any of the terms
of this Order, then a Peace Officer shall provide assistance to ensure that the offending
party complies with its terms. Before enforcing the terms of this Order, a Peace Officerfor restraining orders will remain the same but the following clause will be used in other matters:
If either of the parties or any other person on their behalf, breaches any of the terms
of this Order, then a Peace Officer shall provide assistance to ensure that the offending
must first ensure that the party has been served with a copy of this Order. If not served, the
party must be shown a copy of the Order by the Peace Officer and be given a reasonable
time to comply with its terms. If the party fails or refuses to comply with this Order, the
Peace Officer shall do such lawful acts as may be necessary to give effect to its terms
including, if necessary, arrest, detain and bring the party at the earliest possible time before
a Justice of the Court of Queen’s Bench to show cause why the party should not be cited
for civil contempt.party must be shown a copy of the Order by the Peace Officer and be given a reasonable
time to comply with its terms. If the party fails or refuses to comply with this Order, the
Peace Officer shall do such lawful acts as may be necessary to give effect to its terms
including, if necessary, arrest, detain and bring the party at the earliest possible time before
a Justice of the Court of Queen’s Bench to show cause why the party should not be cited
http://www.albertacourts.ab.ca/qb/notices/ConsolidatedNoticestotheProfesionSept2004.pdf
I can't find anything on the internet that talks about PEO in Ontario. I did look at the Children's Law Reform act and it states the following:
Order to locate and take child
(2) Where a court is satisfied upon application that there are reasonable and probable grounds for believing,
(a) that any person is unlawfully withholding a child from a person entitled to custody of or access to the child;
(b) that a person who is prohibited by court order or separation agreement from removing a child from Ontario proposes to remove the child or have the child removed from Ontario; or
(c) that a person who is entitled to access to a child proposes to remove the child or to have the child removed from Ontario and that the child is not likely to return,
the court by order may direct a police force, having jurisdiction in any area where it appears to the court that the child may be, to locate, apprehend and deliver the child to the person named in the order. R.S.O. 1990, c. C.12, s. 36 (2).
This would indicate that it shouldn't (in theory) be a problem to get a child back if they are taken without consent but it doesn't talk about abusive situation.
Order to locate and take child
(2) Where a court is satisfied upon application that there are reasonable and probable grounds for believing,
(a) that any person is unlawfully withholding a child from a person entitled to custody of or access to the child;
(b) that a person who is prohibited by court order or separation agreement from removing a child from Ontario proposes to remove the child or have the child removed from Ontario; or
(c) that a person who is entitled to access to a child proposes to remove the child or to have the child removed from Ontario and that the child is not likely to return,
the court by order may direct a police force, having jurisdiction in any area where it appears to the court that the child may be, to locate, apprehend and deliver the child to the person named in the order. R.S.O. 1990, c. C.12, s. 36 (2).
This would indicate that it shouldn't (in theory) be a problem to get a child back if they are taken without consent but it doesn't talk about abusive situation.
- Status