Share this article
Teca Menu
- Teca Home
- Teca translator
- Expression-web-design-review.html
- FREE INFO BAGS PURSES
- Carpet Dye info
- Hydroponics How to
- Warning needle sticking
- to kids who were born in
- Learn About Spam
- Canon Powershot S3 IS Review
- do not buy saeco
- Teca thanks premier
- revenge the telemarketer
- dell exploding
- Teca register
- No Balls
- census eupdate
- census issues clarified
- FOXTEL INFO
- saving on petrol
- Teca Landlords tenants
- Articles Index
- TECA Games
- Recycled water
- Council Letter
- ausis goldn brown
- storm warning
- Teca Jokes
- Teca Jokes text xml
- Teca Fun Pics
- Teca News
- Teca POLL
- Teca centre WIKI
- Help at TECA
- Press Centre
- Link Me to TECA
- Teca Classifieds
- Auction at TECA
- JoomlA
- Links More
- teca Google info
GET ONLINE WITH AUSIS
VISIT OUR DOMAIN SERVICES FOR GREAT PACKAGES TO GET YOU ONLINE FASTER
Fabulous organisation for multiple sclerosis in the UKIn our research we came across the above link and found the site was run by sqiffy over at stumble upon. Please take the time to visit for a bit of fun and education...
HAVE A NICE DAY
WE WISH YOU LUCK
by: Erwin Seltzer
There had been a growing trend, in Ontario, in family and divorce law, over the last few years, for family courts to order joint custody of children. The hope, by some, was that the parenting skills of the parties could be improved with awards of joint custody. The recent Ontario Court of Appeal decision of Kaplanis v. Kaplanis, has tried to put this trend into perspective.
In this decision, the parties were married in 1998 and separated in January 2002. The parties had a daughter who was born in October 2001. At trial, the father requested joint custody and the mother opposed the application, stating that the parties could not communicate without screaming at each other. The trial judge granted the parties joint custody and the mother appealed the order. The appeal court set aside the order of joint custody and the mother was granted sole custody.
The Appeal Court held that, for an award of joint custody to be granted, there must be some evidence that demonstrates, that despite the parent’s own strong conflict with each other, the parties can and have cooperated and communicated appropriately with one another. In this case there was evidence to the contrary, there was no expert evidence to help the trial judge determine how a joint custody order would advance the child’s emotional and psychological needs and the child was too young to communicate her own wishes.
Approximately the same time this case was decided, the Ontario Court of Appeal also ruled on the case of Ladisa v. Ladisa, where the appeal court upheld the trial judge’s order of joint custody. In this case the trial judge had the benefit of hearing the evidence of the Children’s Lawyer who presented the children’s wishes and who recommended joint custody. It was held that the trial judge had heard evidence from third parties with respect to cooperation and appropriate communication between the parties. The trial judge also looked at the history of co-parenting during the marriage and that despite their intense conflict, the parties could and had effectively communicated with each other and placed the interests of their children ahead their own, when required.
To summarize, in Ontario joint custody cases, it would appear that the courts will now be looking more closely for evidence from third party and expert witnesses, which can demonstrate that the parties can and have cooperated and communicated appropriately and have been able to put aside their own differences and conflict, for the benefit of the children. The lack of historical cooperation and appropriate communication between the parties will greatly limit the success of a joint custody application. The assumption by some, that the granting of joint custody will improve the parenting skills of the parties, will not be a sufficient reason on it’s own to grant joint custody, in the absence of existing good cooperation and communication between the parties.
About The Author Erwin Seltzer practices Family and Divorce Law and Wills and Estates Law in York Region and Toronto. Erwin can be reached at (905) 474-4333. |
OUR ASSOCIATES
SITES
TECACENTRE.NET COMMUNITY SOLUTIONS A HEAP OF INFO HAVE YOUR SAY AND MORE
tecacentre.netGAMES A PLENTY at TECACENTRE.NET
tecacentre games, Frogger, shooting, golf, bowling and moreSUBMIT YOUR ARTICLES AND INFORMATIVE ARTICLES A PLENTY TO ENLIGHTEN YOU
the-doctors.info solutions and articlesLIVE SOLUTIONS BOOK BY EMAIL FOR AN APPOINTMENT AND ARTICLES A PLENTY
aussiess.info solutions and articlesSUBMIT YOUR PRODUCTS AND SERVICES FOR TESTING TO ENLIGHTEN YOU ON HOW TO BECOME THE BEST and for everything that is best
thebestisit.com for everything that is bestDon't forget ausis great mate...
Post Comments Queries or Suggestions on ourausis.info Bulletin Board
Email: ausisit@gmail.com
ausis WIKI Our ausis WIKI pages were you can communicate with us or others!!
![[Valid RSS]](../valid-rss.png "Validate my RSS feed")
The owners of this site are to be held harmless as each individual that posts hereon is responsible for their own comments. Please note that any mention of any trademarks, names, products etc are the property of the original owners/holders. Use of this site is based on you agreeing to waive any and all claims against the publisher and associated businesses or owners of this site. Site owners will not be held liable for any actions or third party actions that maybe encountered using this site. This is due to the fact that this site is based on and for a community effort to help keep peace. Your own independent legal advice should be gained on subjects listed hereon prior to using them for your own use, these and other terms may apply and must be read in conjunction with the full terms, available on request.
All work is copyright (c) www.tecacentre.net and WWW.AUSIS.INFO (c) 1990 -2007 Used under licence All rights reserved.