Focus On
NEW In-House Counsel | Insurance | Intellectual Property | Immigration | Natural Resources | Real Estate | Tax

Family

Latest

Thursday, March 02, 2017 @ 7:00 PM

Family Law - CHILD SUPPORT - Calculation or attribution of income - Financial disclosure - Practice and procedure - Orders - Variation or amendment of orders - Bars to application - Appeals

Appeal by the father from a chambers judgment refusing reduction of child support. Five months prior to the hearing that resulted in the judgment under appeal, the matter was adjourned sine die. The father was granted leave to return the matter to the chambers list once he provided his income tax documents for the years 2013, 2014 and 2015. Following the hearing, the chambers judge dismissed the father’s application on the basis of incomplete financial information. The chambers judge seized herself of all future applications by the father and directed him to seek permission prior to making any future applications. The father appealed on the basis the chambers judge was biased, the mother failed to provide her income tax information, and the ruling was made in the absence of submissions. ... [read more]

Thursday, March 02, 2017 @ 7:00 PM

News

■ Carolyn Lloyd is a new partner in Lerners LLP’s London, Ont., office. Lloyd is an established family law litigator with a strong focus on alternative dispute resolution, including family law mediation, arbitration and collaborative family law. She is the acting chair of Collaborative Family Law of London and Middlesex. ... [read more]

Tuesday, February 28, 2017 @ 1:35 PM

Ottawa lawyers’ declaration of parentage illustrates shift in family law

Lynda Collins and Natasha Bakht are colleagues at the University of Ottawa’s Faculty of Law, they are friends, neighbours, and now they’re “co-mamas” to a boy named Elaan. ... [read more]

Tuesday, February 28, 2017 @ 10:00 AM

CUSTODY AND ACCESS - Considerations - Best interests of child - Conduct of parents - Willingness to facilitate access with other parent - Expert report or assessment

Appeal by the mother from an order governing parenting arrangements and child support. The parties married in 2006. They were the parents of two girls, ages eight and nine. The parties increasingly spent time apart due to mother's desire to spend time with her parents. In 2010, the mother claimed the oldest child disclosed inappropriate touching by the father. She advised the father she was terminating the marriage and obtained interim without notice orders of sole custody without access. Complaints were filed with police and social services. The father denied any wrongdoing. He consented to an order limiting his parenting time to supervised access of four hours per week. The access regime remained in place until the trial in 2015. The trial judge determined that generous unsupervised parenting time with the father was consistent with the children's best interests. The judge cited expert reports, and preferred the evidence of the father and his witnesses to that of the mother. The trial judge found the mother's credibility was severely impaired. On the issue of support, the trial judge refused retroactive support and ordered ongoing support of $758 based on an imputed income of $50,000, reducible to $558 due to hardship to the father. The mother appealed. ... [read more]

Tuesday, February 28, 2017 @ 9:59 AM

CHILD SUPPORT - Calculation or attribution of income - Financial disclosure - Practice and procedure - Orders - Variation or amendment of orders - Bars to application - Appeals

Appeal by the father from a chambers judgment refusing reduction of child support. Five months prior to the hearing that resulted in the judgment under appeal, the matter was adjourned sine die. The father was granted leave to return the matter to the chambers list once he provided his income tax documents for the years 2013, 2014 and 2015. Following the hearing, the chambers judge dismissed the father's application on the basis of incomplete financial information. The chambers judge seized herself of all future applications by the father and directed him to seek permission prior to making any future applications. The father appealed on the basis the chambers judge was biased, the mother failed to provide her income tax information, and the ruling was made in the absence of submissions. ... [read more]

Thursday, February 23, 2017 @ 7:00 PM

Website offers step-by-step legal information

Not applicable ... [read more]

Thursday, February 23, 2017 @ 7:00 PM

Family Law - ADOPTION - Consent of natural parents - Practice and procedure - Discovery - Production and inspection of documents -- Appeals

Not applicable ... [read more]

Wednesday, February 22, 2017 @ 11:21 AM

ADOPTION - Consent of natural parents - Practice and procedure - Discovery - Production and inspection of documents - Appeals

Application by the appellant father to vary an appellate chambers judgment. The father was a citizen of Saudi Arabia living in Canada under an expired student visa. The child was born in 2009. The mother initially denied paternity, listed the father as unknown, and commenced the adoption process. The Director of Adoption became the child's guardian. In 2010, DNA testing established the father's parentage. The Director advised the father that the child was placed for prospective adoption. The child resided with the prospective adoptive parents from September 2010 onward. The father commenced a claim for custody and guardianship. In 2014, the first trial resulted in the father obtaining two and one-half hours of supervised contact every six weeks. In 2015, an appeal granted the father co-guardianship with conditions that included a provision for a second trial in the event the parties were unable to agree on parenting arrangements. No agreement was reached and the matter proceeded to trial management. A trial management conference resulted in refusal of the father's request for specified interim unsupervised parenting time, and further oral and documentary discovery of the Director regarding the prospective adoptive parents. The father appealed on the basis the trial management judge misconstrued the scope of the issues at trial. An appellate chambers judge denied leave to appeal. The father sought variation of the order refusing leave. ... [read more]

Thursday, February 16, 2017 @ 7:00 PM

Mandated counselling

It has always been thought that counselling can only be beneficial if the person voluntarily selects a counsellor, books the appointments, wishes to benefit from counselling and, most importantly, attends willingly. ... [read more]

Thursday, February 16, 2017 @ 7:00 PM

Family Law - Marital property - Equalization or division - Exempt acquisitions and deductions - Pre-marriage and post-separation acquisitions - Tracing - Settlements - Appeals and judicial review

Appeal by the husband from a trial judgment interpreting a consent order and excluding certain family property. The parties moved in together in 2005, married in 2006 and separated in 2014. The parties maintained separate finances throughout their relationship, including bank accounts and investments. Each assumed responsibility for some family expenses. Each party agreed that their respective condominiums were excluded from equalization. In addition, each party claimed portions of other assets could be traceable to pre-relationship assets and thus constituted excluded property. Several property issues were resolved at a settlement conference and incorporated into a consent order. At trial, the parties disputed interpretation of the property division provisions in the consent order. The trial judge interpreted the consent order to require identification of family property to be determined by first considering whether any portion of the assets were excluded property. The excluded portion of any joint asset went to the party providing the asset, with the remaining value to be divided equally. Solely-owned assets were to be retained, subject to an equalization payment based on equal division. The trial judge characterized certain monetary transfers the wife received from her family as gifts and traced them into current assets excluded from division. The husband’s claims of exclusion were rejected, save for a portion of the proceeds from the sale of the family home attributable to three pre-relationship assets. The husband appealed. ... [read more]