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.

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:

• Any indictable offence that required at least 5 years in prison

• A Schedule 1 indictable or summary offence
• Manslaughter for which at least 2 years were served in prison
• An offence under the Criminal Code or other federal legislation)

The waiting time will be increased to 5 years for the following offences:

• An indictable offence other than a sexual offence
• A summary sexual offence

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.

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.

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.

The three most common type of charges under the new distracted driving law are:

1. Holding a communication device,
2. Using a handheld entertainment device
3. Looking at a display screen.

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.

The Ignition Interlock Conduct Review Programme is muted to start on 3^rd 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

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.

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.

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.”

Under the common provision, the parents have joint guardianship over the children and the parental rights are equal. Each parent has an equal right to child custody when they separate.

When determining the home in which to place the child, the court tries to reach a decision that is in the best interests of the child. This includes considering the wishes of the parents, the child, the siblings, the child’s comfort in his home, school, and community, and the mental and physical health of the involved individuals.

When a court awards exclusive child custody to one parent, the non-custodial parent maintains the right to see and visit the child. One of the most difficult things to deal with after the divorce is when one parent denies access to the other either by not making the children available when they come to pick them up or returning the children late, sometimes by an entire day.

From a legal point of view, the options for dealing with denial of access are unfortunately limited. The police will usually stay out of such disputes and tell you to contact you lawyer. It’s very frustrating to have time and plans with your children ruined without any notice. So, what can you do?

It is recommended that you send an official letter to the other parent or their lawyer. This is done so that in the future you can prove the other parent has denied you access to your children.

Another good idea is to demand make up time. This is in the best interest of the children. You can use denied access materials to build a case as to why you should have the sole child custody. One factor courts consider in awarding child custody is the willingness of each parent to facilitate access to the child by the other parent.

The last resort for dealing with denied access by bringing a motion for contempt of court. There are a lot of difficulties in proceeding this way, but if the other parent is persistent in denying access you really have no choice. It generally not worth going to court about an occasional missed access period.