Worth going to trial
- Thread starter Links17
- Start date
trinton
Banned
if you win and collect your costs or most of your costs.. def worth it. '
if you win and don't get your costs.. as long as it costs you $50k or less.. you still profit - but is it worth the anal pain?
if you lose and get ordered to pay costs not worth it
if you lose and no costs,, then you incurred the other sides debt just for shits and giggles.
with a good $300/hr lawyer.. 5 day trial.. probably $15-20k? but then again, we all know how precise lawyer quotes are.
don't count on them. but then again, if you had a lawyer you could count on you wouldn't be asking here how much it would cost. but I would say $15-20k with a human lawyer.Me being the type of person who would call in to work sick in order to go to court over a $20 parking ticket to cut it in half.. I would sue for $60k in a heart beat.
Last edited:
It depends how strong are your other positions.
Re occupational rent - In my case, judge Penny (393 University Ave., Toronto) ignored my facts and supporting evidences re occupation rent.
Re costs - During entire litigation, the judges were writing endorsements that a trial judge should decide re the costs at previous steps. I was represented by lawyer only for the first 6 months and self-representing for the following 4.5 years. I was awarded costs around 70% for the period with a lawyer and ONLY part of disbursements for the period of self-representing.
I had very strong positions in every issue of my case. Nevertheless, judge Penny cut everything to minimum minimorum. A lot of serious facts & evidences presented during the trial were not mentioned in the judgement, including domestic contract (prepared by the lawyer and signed by witnesses) etc. All facts re bad faith of opposing party were hidden too. By the way, three judges of Court of Appeal for Ontario did the same.
P.S. Opposing lawyer claimed around $12k per day + disbursements for the trial and preparation.
Re occupational rent - In my case, judge Penny (393 University Ave., Toronto) ignored my facts and supporting evidences re occupation rent.
Re costs - During entire litigation, the judges were writing endorsements that a trial judge should decide re the costs at previous steps. I was represented by lawyer only for the first 6 months and self-representing for the following 4.5 years. I was awarded costs around 70% for the period with a lawyer and ONLY part of disbursements for the period of self-representing.
I had very strong positions in every issue of my case. Nevertheless, judge Penny cut everything to minimum minimorum. A lot of serious facts & evidences presented during the trial were not mentioned in the judgement, including domestic contract (prepared by the lawyer and signed by witnesses) etc. All facts re bad faith of opposing party were hidden too. By the way, three judges of Court of Appeal for Ontario did the same.
P.S. Opposing lawyer claimed around $12k per day + disbursements for the trial and preparation.
Generally speaking I'd say no, but it depends on your level of risk tolerance and chances of success.
If you have a greater than 80% chance of success as the law and facts are on your side, then maybe you can handle the 'relatively' low likelihood of failure and being ordered to pay costs.
If your chances of success are less than 10%, it would be a stupid move unless you're confident the other side will capitulate to avoid a trial.
50/50? Are you comfortable throwing 60-120k on Black in a game of roulette?
Janus
New member
Occupational rent is one of those things that, from my reading of the case law, only seems to get ordered when it is offsetting something else (eg. mortgage payments). If there is no offset, the judges usually don't seem to be too happy at the idea of ordering it.
Was the property division ordered by a judge? Was there an equalization agreement that was signed?
If it wasn't signed, then it is still open to change. If it was signed (or ordered by a judge) then overturning that is not at all a slam dunk win, because it was agreed to (or ordered) in the first place.
So, if you had a high likelihood of winning, then I would go for it. I think there is a certain value in pushing to court when you know you are going to win. In this case though, even without knowing any details, it seems sketchy.
Issue 1: Occupational Rent is one factor - paid the mortgage for several months 8 months while other person was living there with their own kids (16,000$). The other person had a job and could have afforded the mortgage.
Issue 2: It seems that the property division was not done properly so I am estimating about (35,000$). This is pretty cut and dry.
There are a few other issues in terms of how debts were paid.
All in all about 60k
There has been no judgement of any sort or any signed agreement.
Issue 2: It seems that the property division was not done properly so I am estimating about (35,000$). This is pretty cut and dry.
There are a few other issues in terms of how debts were paid.
All in all about 60k
There has been no judgement of any sort or any signed agreement.
Pursuinghappiness
New member
Confusing. If you don't have any type of agreement and property division isn't done, are simply modifying the amount you're already working on getting resolved. Because that's significantly different from re-litigating a previous agreement.
trinton
Banned
I agree. your chances are much higher now. say you collect 60k and pay a lawyer 60 k and get 20k of your costs. 20k in your pocket after 9 or 10 months if no delays and adjournments?
she may even back down if it leads to a trial. might as well just burn it out to lawyers instead of giving it to her.
I would only proceed with a very good lawyer who doesn't have their head up their ass.
Pursuinghappiness
New member
There are many divorces that have equalization below the 60k threshold so it seems reasonable to try to get a fair share of that amount of money.
The question is how valid is your claim and how strong is your evidence. I'd simply review it with a lawyer and determine how feasible it is.
If its over 50% feasible and you're pretty sure you can either settle it without trial and/or not end up paying costs...I'd proceed.
The question is how valid is your claim and how strong is your evidence. I'd simply review it with a lawyer and determine how feasible it is.
If its over 50% feasible and you're pretty sure you can either settle it without trial and/or not end up paying costs...I'd proceed.