Mandatory Mediation has became a permanent feature of the rules of Toronto and Ottawa courts in 1999 and at some point, mandatory mediation will eventually be a requirement in court for most of the province of Ontario. Mandatory mediation states that within 30 days of filing a litigation process, the parties must choose a mediator. The choice of a mediator may be from the court-approved list of mediators , or as agreed upon between the parties. If the parties fail to choose a mediator within the required time, a mediator from the roster is assigned to them. In the case of disagreement over the mediator, the party with carriage of the mediation has to notify file with the Local Mediation Coordinator to request that a mediator is assigned to the case. Once a mediator is appointed, the mediator must set a date for the mediation and serve notice regarding the date, time and venue on all who must attend at least 20 days before the mediation session.
Mandatory mediation rule applies to most non-family civil court matters where the claim exceeds $50,000.00.
The Ontario Mandatory Mediation Program exempts family law cases, which have been filed in court, from mandatory mediation. However, mediation is still a good option in order to save time, money and aggravation. Using mediation as a method of solving disagreements means that there are no embarrassing court appearances, where personal issues are brought out into the open court, indeed with mediation, personal issues can remain private and there is no strict code of conduct to follow, so all parties may speak more freely than if they went to court. Confidentiality plays a crucial role in mediation and mediators cannot be forced to give evidence in court unless the case involves actual or threatened criminal acts or child abuse.
As of the 15th of July Manitobans who talk on their cellphones or text while driving will be fined $199.80. The amendments to the Highway Traffic Act also prohibit smoking in a vehicle when a child under the age of 16 is present.
Manitoba minister of transportation reckons that the new measures aim at preventing car accidents and promoting healthier living for children.
Even though there are no plans at the moment to have targeted enforcement of the ban, Winnipeg police officers have been asked to pay special attention to people using phones while on the road during the next few days. Police said they are looking for people on their cellphones who are driving poorly. Drivers caught talking on hand-held cell phones will not lose merits on their license and will only be given tickets.
Even if you’re not texting or talking on the phone while driving, you can still be ticketed just for holding the phone in their hands while behind the wheel. It needs to be put in a holder that’s affixed to the car. It can’t be lying on your lap and you can’t hold it, police officers say.
Manitoba joins the ranks of several other provinces that currently have similar bans in place, including Ontario and British Columbia. The new Manitoba law permits people to use cellphones while driving if the equipment is a hands-free device that is used in a hands-free manner, said provincial officials.
Many Manitobans have already switched to hands-free devices, but a number of drivers are still talking and texting using hand-held devices. People using hand-held phones must pull over and have their vehicle in park to talk. People can only use a hand-held cellphone while driving in emergencies to contact fire, ambulance or police services under the new law.
Under the newly proposed bill convicted criminals will have to wait longer after the completion of their sentence in order to apply for a “record suspension”, which was formerly called pardon.
This bill is also known as the “Limiting Pardons for Serious Crimes” Act. Its purpose is to prevent people with serious offences from getting a pardon. Bill C-23A states that 10 years must be completed after any kind of sentence (and these include not only imprisonment but probation and payment of fines) before a pardon can be granted. There are several categories of offences that will be influenced by this bill:
The waiting time will be increased to 5 years for the following offences:
For a summary offence other than a sexuyal offence, the waiting time will be increased to 3 years. Furthermore, some people who are now eligible for a pardon will no longer be eligible for a “record suspension” because there are new rules concerning eligibility. For example, people who have been convicted of 3 indictable offences or offences of a sexual nature will no longer be eligible for a record suspension.
Under the current Criminal Records Act (CRA), anyone with a criminal conviction in Canada regardless of their immigration status may apply for a Canadian pardon for one or more of their crimes once three to five years have elapsed. A pardon or a “record suspension” does not mean that a criminal record is wiped out although it will be taken out of the Canadian Police Information Centre and will not show up on any checks of the public records in Canada.
A recent Ontario Court of Appeal decision highlights the gravity the court attaches to cases of parental alienation syndrome in divorce and child custody cases. It is described as unprecedented as there is no other case in Canada where access to a child from the age of 10 to 18 has been terminated.
In this case the decision was in favour of the mother, who was given full custody of the youngest child in the family. The court issued a restraining order keeping the father from contacting his ex-wife or the youngest child; and awarded the mother more than $320,000. This decision was based on an overwhelming concern that child would become a victim of the Parental Alienation Syndrome.
Basically, the Parental Alienation Syndrome (PAS) is present when a child is brainwashed into thinking the other parent is the enemy through verbal and non verbal signals. This ranges from bad mouthing the other parent in front of the children, to withholding visits or telephone conversations with the other parent.
The judges found that the three oldest children of the marriage, who are now adults, were alienated from their mother by the father, who has taken aggressive steps towards this end. The panel believes that if the father had access to the youngest child, he would continue his foul practices.
Canadian law dictates that in the case of a divorce, both parents have a financial responsibility towards their children. If the mother has custody of the children as in this case, the father is required to pay child support, which is calculated according to his earnings. In this case the mother was awarded a very large sum of money ($320,000) since the father has abused the children in the family over a long period of time and has incurred vast emotional damage.
Family courts in the cities of Brampton and Milton have started a new initiative this week about helping parents who go though separation and divorce and their children. Judges, lawyers and mediators work together to provide information sessions to parents in the GTA area who plan to divorce in order to inform them about the impact the divorce might have on their children and help them resolve their disputes. Some senior lawyers, also known as dispute resolution officers, help parents to find a less confrontational ways to resolve conflicts before going to court. One of these ways is mediation. Mediation involves a more informal approach to problem solving; and it has been a particularly successful way of resolving domestic disputes.
Brampton and Milton courts were the first courts in the GTA area chosen for the new experiment that is meant to take stress off families who go through hard times. Attorney General Chris Bentley reckons that this initiative will help parents resolve problems with less emotional stress which is detrimental for their children. Hopefully it will Reduce family court battles and help children receive fair levels of child support by requiring annual disclosure of financial information relating to child support payments. The system of family justice has long been in need of a reform and these two GTA courts are the first one to make significant steps in this direction.
Family courts in Ontario process about 160,000 cases per year, most of them in the GTA area. Mostly they deal with matters such as child custody and restraining orders. Ontario parents can also get help understanding how to start a case in family law through another initiative, an interactive tool that helps them fill out 11 of the most common Ontario family court and Ontario small court forms.
Distracted driving is still a big problem in Ontario. It is one of the most common cases of provincial offence. Since the law banning drivers from using distracting electronic devices was passed in February, Ontario provincial police have issued 2,279 distracted driving charges. It seems like drivers are not getting the message when it comes to distracted driving. Last month, Toronto provincial police issued 4,400 provincial offence drivers in the first three months of enforcing the new law.
The three most common type of charges under the new distracted driving law are:
Ontario Drivers caught using one of these electronic communications to do things such as texting or talking while driving face a fine of $155. Moreover, if the police officer deems it proper, they could lay more serious charges such as careless driving or dangerous driving. The maximum fine for a ticket is $500. Tickets must be served within 30 days of the distracted driving offence. If you are served with one, you should pay it within 15 days of its receipt. The easiest way to deal with your distracted driving ticket is to pay your fine to the relevant authority. Payment of your fines means you are admitting your guilt, but it in most cases it will not result in a criminal record. If you do not pay the fine within this time limit, they may receive a Provincial Offence Notice Part III, which is a court summons.
Distracted drivers are dangerous because they are the ones that travel at irregular speed, and are all over the road, interfering with other drivers who have their children in the car and want to drive sensibly and reach their destination safely.
Drinking and driving offences in Ontario have been a recurring problem and one of the main focuses of the Safer Roads for a Safer Ontario Act. According to government statistics, a quarter of all motor vehicle fatalities in Ontario are the result of drinking and driving; on top of this, 75 per cent of convicted drunk drivers continue to drive despite driving bans. The Ontario government intends to limit recurring drink driving by giving reduced licence suspensions for those drunk drivers who participate in the Ignition Interlock Conduct Review programme.
The Ignition Interlock Conduct Review Programme is muted to start on 3rd August this year. Eligible convicted drivers will be selected for participation in the programme and will be given their licences back much sooner than before. The programme works by giving the suspended drink driver a device that fits on to their car’s ignition system. The device stops the car from starting if it detects alcohol on the driver’s breath (the device is programmed to stop when alcohol readings exceed 20 milligrams in 100 millilitres of blood from a breath sample.) The law in Ontario currently dictates that first time impaired drivers face a one-year licence suspension, yet with the new programme, drunk drivers will receive a reduced suspension of around three months followed by nine months of driving with an ignition interlock device.
Lawyers in the province argue that the new programme unfairly punishes drunk drivers because they must enter a guilty plea once the interlock ignition device detects an illegal alcohol reading.
The programme has been designed to modify the behaviour of impaired drivers. Using the interlock ignition device is aimed at training drivers not to drink alcohol again when getting into their cars and when used over a nine month period, the impaired driver’s behaviour is expected to change.
There are huge benefits to impaired drivers eligible for the programme particularly those in rural areas with weak transport links; in the past these drivers may have lost their livelihood because getting in to work was difficult without a car. Nevertheless, some Ontario lawyers are in arms about the programme because eligibility depends on a guilty plea. Ontario lawyers feel that some drivers may be ignoring the fact that they have a valid defence and simply pleading guilty to get onto the programme, when their lawyers could fight the charges.
For more free legal advice visit www.legalcanadacommunity.com
Miriam Goodger is considering submitting a claim to Small Claims Court Toronto after she had been victimized by a fraudulent moving company two weeks ago. Goodger made arrangement with the company to shift her furniture. They came to her house, quoted a very low price for moving, in her case $350, and then they collected her goods and held them hostage, until she pays another $887 to the total of $1, 237. When the frauds collected the extra payment, they left Goodger’s furniture in front of the apartment building entrance, in the rain, and she had to move it up 12 flights of stairs.
After 5-month investigation, the police have finally arrested the 9 people running the moving company and charged them with fraud. They have also seized their trucks and a large amount of money in cash. The police believe that there might have been other victims of this fraud scheme.
The best legal advice for Goodger and for other fraud victims in her situation is to file a claim with the Small Claims Court Toronto. Each province sets its own Small Claims Court limit on the maximum amount of money that can be claimed via using this procedure. This year the Ontario Small Claim Court limit is $25,000 which will well cover for the blackmail money in Goodger’s and other similar cases.
When considering filing a claim with Small Claim Court, it is important to remember that anyone over 18 can claim him/herself, without having to resort to a paralegal or a lawyer. If one is filing a small claim against a company, they must use the correct company name. Ontario Small Claims Court forms can either be downloaded for free. One must be well prepared for the Small Claims Court .One can present evidence and call witnesses relevant to the case. Once the judge has made a decision on a case, all of the parties involved are sent a Certificate of Judgment. However, winning the case does not necessarily mean that the plaintiff will receive the damages owed to them; in Toronto Small Claims Courts there are a number of procedures one follow to recover their claim.
Currently declared inadmissible to the United States, the renowned Toronto sports doctor Anthony Galea was refused entry into the country when he was found to be lying to guards at the border. The doctor, whose patients include many famous sports personalities like PGA golfer Tiger Woods and Canadian sports personalities Patrick Chan and Donvovan Bailey, is accused of prescribing human growth hormone (HGH) along with other illegal sports drugs including Actovegin to some of his athlete patients. HGH is banned in almost all sports and Actovegin, which speeds up the healing process, is banned in the United States. Galea has earned thousands of dollars prescribing drugs banned in most sports to his star patients in both the US and Canada with around $200,000 has been paid by three NFL athletes alone.
An indictment against the doctor and his assistant Mary Anne Catalano has been filed claiming his inadmissibility to the United States on the basis that he failed to declare his true purpose for travelling there and failed to declare the illegal drugs he was carrying with him. It is not clear whether the drugs were used to heal injuries faster or to enhance performance.
Mary Anne Catalano has waived her right to receive legal counsel in favour of co-operating with US investigator. She is likely to receive a minor charge because of her co-operation with US law enforcement.
Dr. Galea may be able to defend his reasons for treating his US clients, but one allegation he will not be able to defend is the fact that he lied to US border guards. In the US, this is classed as a serious crime on a par with deceiving the government.
Persons who are declared inadmissible to the US are unable to legally enter the country. In some cases the ban on entry is indefinite for others it lasts for 10 years. The only way to combat inadmissibility is to apply for a US waiver; a process that takes anything from 6 to 18 months depending on the severity of the crime.
Ontario is taking two new steps to create a more user friendly small claims court and family justice system. Ontario will provide information meetings on small claims court and family justice issues as well as introducing an online tool to help applicants to complete legal forms.
The new online tool dubbed the Ontario Court Forms Assistant is designed to help applicants fill out the most commonly-used forms for the small claims and family courts. Using the forms assistant will enable applicants to fill out forms that will help them to get a restraining order or apply for child custody or change a child support order or open a family court case or reply to a family law claim. When an applicant selects a legal form online, they are asked certain questions relating to their case and once these have been answered they can download their own personal completed form.
The proposed information sessions will provide information on a variety of civil and family law topics such as how to come to terms with divorce and separation and the effect they have on children and adults as well as effective alternatives to solving civil disputes like mediation and arbitration. For the court authorities the online processing coupled with more information will speed up the court process.
The new program is part of Ontario Attorney General, Chris Bentley’s program of family justice reform, which he announced in December 2009. Bentley says that the move will make the province’s family court system more accessible, cost effective and simple to use. The information sessions will also help Ontarians to make better informed decisions. The program was applauded by Minister of Children and Youth Services and Minister Responsible for Women’s Issues, Laurel Broten who commented that “When relationships break down, it is important for families, especially women, to receive early information about their legal rights and responsibilities, and the impact of separation and divorce on children and adults, so they can make the best choices for themselves and their children.”
