We are a collegial team of family lawyers in Richmond Hill looking for a family law clerk to bring their knowledge in legal clerking, strong interpersonal skills, work ethic, and sense of humour to our team. An Ideal Candidate Will: have a minimum of 2 years experience working as a family law clerk, and a law clerk diploma; have knowledge of the Family Law Rules and ability to navigate relevant practice directions. Experience with trials is an asset, though not required; draft letters, affidavits, complete financial statements, briefs, agreements, etc. research legal topics and prepare research memos; serve and file court materials; be proficient in DivorceMate, Caselines, One-key, and Westlaw; have a passion for helping people going through a difficult time, and a willingness to go the extra kilometer for our clients. Particulars of the Position: This full-time, permanent role is hybrid, with approximately 3 days spent in the office each week. We offer a salary commensurate with experience and a supportive work environment. Our Firm: At Krol & Krol, we pride ourselves on providing high-quality legal services while being compassionate to our clients in the practice of family law. We believe that our team-driven approach and the work environment we have...
On June 21st, 2019, the Government of Canada introduced Bill C-78, with an intention to update and strengthen the federal family laws. Being the first substantive change in over 20 years, Bill C-78 is critical in ensuring the family justice system is more efficient and accessible. Changes include, but are not limited to, promoting the best interests of the child, addressing violence in the family home, and reducing child poverty. On June 5th, 2020, the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada, the Honourable David Lametti, announced that there would be a delay to the changes of the Divorce Act. Initially the changes were scheduled to be released by July 1st, 2020. However, the COVID-19 pandemic created extraordinary circumstances, impeding on the government’s ability to meet its original deadline. Consequently, the changes will instead come into force on March 1st, 2021. To learn more about the delays associated with Bill C-78 visit https://www.canada.ca/en/department-justice/news/2020/06/government-delays-divorce-act-amendments-coming-in-to-force-in-response-to-requests-from-justice-partners-due-to-covid-19-pandemic.html
In 2019, the Ontario Court of Appeal in the case of A.M. v. C.H. found that the trial judge reasonably concluded that the child's best interests mandated parenting time with the father and reconciliation therapy, over the child's heated objections. "Without any conclusive evidence that such orders are ineffective — see for instance, Nicholas C. Bala and Katie Hunter, "Children Resisting Contact & Parental Alienation: Context, Challenges & Recent Ontario Cases" (2015) .. this court should not and cannot interfere." (para. 76) This paper, authored by Nicholas C. Bala and Katie Hunter, notes that the legal profession can have a critical role in “encouraging” parents who engage in alienating behavior to desist in such behaviour and focus on the interests of their children. Further, even though in many less severe alienation cases parents can be helped (or pressured) to reduce their conflict, in the most severe alienation cases contact with an alienating parent may need to be suspended to prevent emotional trauma to the child. In other cases, it may be best for the child to give up efforts to legally enforce contact with a rejected parent. To access this original paper authored by Nicholas C. Bala and Katie Hunter, click here.
The Ontario Court of Appeal in Diamond v. Berman, 2021 ONCA 653 upheld the trial decision of Diamond v. Berman, 2020 ONSC 1566. At trial, Justice McGee declined to impute income to the support recipient. Justice McGee also awarded spousal support at the high-end of the range of the Spousal Support Advisory Guidelines. This resulted in an equal sharing of the parties' net disposable incomes. Mark Greenstein, Ashley Krol and Katie Hunter of Krol & Krol represented the support recipient. The support recipient was successful at both the Superior Court of Justice and the Ontario Court of Appeal. The support payor also tried to overturn the costs award against him made by Justice McGee. However, the Court of Appeal upheld the costs ruling against him of $180,800. If you have questions about obtaining spousal support, please contact our lawyers today at 905.707.3370.
In 2021, the Ontario Court of Appeal ("ONCA)) again referenced the paper, authored by Nicholas C. Bala and Katie Hunter, on the topic of parental alienation. The ONCA used this paper to discuss that the social science evidence is inconclusive about whether reversal of custody orders (now called decision-making) in a situation of parental alienation was effective. This paper outlines that transferring decision-making rights should be done only as “a last resort” in cases of parental alienation and that doing so has inherent risks. For instance, if courts delay in transferring decision-making rights too long the transfer may not be effective when it commences. In addition, in the short-term a transfer of decision making may have a negative effect on a child even if it benefits the child in the long term. Ultimately, any transfer of decision making must be in a child’s best interests and the rejected parent and their advisors should have a detailed and child-focused plan to support the transition. To access this original paper authored by Nicholas C. Bala and Katie Hunter, click here. The case referenced, M.P.M. v. A.L.M., 2021 ONCA 465 may be found here.
Background: Rules of Civil Procedure, Rules of Small Claims Court, and the Family Law Rules require the administrative dismissal of court cases on the expiry of particular timelines. Administrative dismissals were suspended from March 16, 2020 to September 13, 2020. This suspension was because of the COVID-19 pandemic, and it ended on September 13, 2020. However, Ontario Courts directed court staff not to administratively dismiss cases beyond this date. This direction will end on May 13, 2024. Purpose of Administrative Dismissals: Administrative dismissals ensure that court cases are resolved in a timely manner. They discourage delays in court cases and attempt to increase efficiency in courts. Current Directive: On May 13, 2024 administrative dismissals resume for civil, Small Claims Court, Divisional Court, and family cases. Specifically, on February 28, 2024, the Ministry of the Attorney General (Ontario) indicated that administrative dismissals of Superior Court civil cases will recommence effective May 13, 2024 if they: have not been set down for trial within five years. Superior Court civil actions started before November 12, 2018, and to which Rule 48.14 of the Rules of Civil Procedure apply that have not been scheduled for trial will be subject to administrative dismissal as of May 13,...
