Sometimes things seem so simple.
They did to me last week when I appeared in Court of Queen's Bench Chambers to have some interim relief granted for a client of mine. I won't get into the detailed facts, however, the crux of the matter is that I was hired by the client after she fired her previous counsel (usually a red flag). I did a review of the file and was left in awe. I was awed by the steps, or lack thereof, taken by previous counsel. I now understood why the client fired her previous lawyer.
My client was a housewife, the husband a highly specialized physician (a fact that previous counsel had failed to advise a judge in chambers). My client was living off $800.00 per month, the good doctor's salary you ask? We would not know because prior counsel had not requested financial disclosure (another shocker). I received the file and immediately filed for interim spousal support and other relief. The matter had already been in front of a Chambers Justice who had directed the matter to an Oral Hearing. Why previous counsel would have agreed to this without some interim relief for the client is beyond me.
The Oral Hearing Order calls for no further court applications unless it is an emergency. In my view it was an emergency as my client was living in abject poverty. It also came to light that the husband earned an income of over $1.5 million last year. This was evidence that was not in front of the Chambers Justice on the first go around. Making the argument of issue estoppel moot (or so I thought).
It seemed so simple. My client had needs and the doctor had the ability to pay. This situation had no equality and in order to continue litigating to get what my client was entitled to she was going to need funds. We needed a band-aid solution. In fact, in every spousal support scenario I outlined to the Chambers Judge the husband, after paying spousal support, would have 85% of the Net Disposable Income (NDI) available to the family. Essentially the interim support would have a drastic impact on my client's standard of living and virtually zero impact on the father.
Upon application to the court the Chambers Justice was having none of it.
He did not apply the test for interim support, he did not apply the test for issue estoppel. Instead he ruled that he had no jurisdiction to deal with the matter and that nothing had changed for my client other than new counsel. I was shocked and frankly utterly dismayed. I had the case law - he didn't want to see it. The jurisdiction position the Honourable Justice had taken had zero merit.
All too often Chambers Judges will not make decisions. I do not understand the reluctance to do so.
The timelines to get in front of a Judge for 2 hours are about 4 months, in the interim people deserve the opportunity to be heard. People deserve justice, even if it is a band-aid solution. The access to justice issue is just not for self-represented litigants. Even individuals with counsel are stonewalled by the delays in the justice system coupled with judges not willing to make a call in 20 minutes.
This judge dared me to go to the Court of Appeal.
I filed my Notice of Appeal on Friday.
Next stop the Alberta Court of Appeal.
They did to me last week when I appeared in Court of Queen's Bench Chambers to have some interim relief granted for a client of mine. I won't get into the detailed facts, however, the crux of the matter is that I was hired by the client after she fired her previous counsel (usually a red flag). I did a review of the file and was left in awe. I was awed by the steps, or lack thereof, taken by previous counsel. I now understood why the client fired her previous lawyer.
My client was a housewife, the husband a highly specialized physician (a fact that previous counsel had failed to advise a judge in chambers). My client was living off $800.00 per month, the good doctor's salary you ask? We would not know because prior counsel had not requested financial disclosure (another shocker). I received the file and immediately filed for interim spousal support and other relief. The matter had already been in front of a Chambers Justice who had directed the matter to an Oral Hearing. Why previous counsel would have agreed to this without some interim relief for the client is beyond me.
The Oral Hearing Order calls for no further court applications unless it is an emergency. In my view it was an emergency as my client was living in abject poverty. It also came to light that the husband earned an income of over $1.5 million last year. This was evidence that was not in front of the Chambers Justice on the first go around. Making the argument of issue estoppel moot (or so I thought).
It seemed so simple. My client had needs and the doctor had the ability to pay. This situation had no equality and in order to continue litigating to get what my client was entitled to she was going to need funds. We needed a band-aid solution. In fact, in every spousal support scenario I outlined to the Chambers Judge the husband, after paying spousal support, would have 85% of the Net Disposable Income (NDI) available to the family. Essentially the interim support would have a drastic impact on my client's standard of living and virtually zero impact on the father.
Upon application to the court the Chambers Justice was having none of it.
He did not apply the test for interim support, he did not apply the test for issue estoppel. Instead he ruled that he had no jurisdiction to deal with the matter and that nothing had changed for my client other than new counsel. I was shocked and frankly utterly dismayed. I had the case law - he didn't want to see it. The jurisdiction position the Honourable Justice had taken had zero merit.
All too often Chambers Judges will not make decisions. I do not understand the reluctance to do so.
The timelines to get in front of a Judge for 2 hours are about 4 months, in the interim people deserve the opportunity to be heard. People deserve justice, even if it is a band-aid solution. The access to justice issue is just not for self-represented litigants. Even individuals with counsel are stonewalled by the delays in the justice system coupled with judges not willing to make a call in 20 minutes.
This judge dared me to go to the Court of Appeal.
I filed my Notice of Appeal on Friday.
Next stop the Alberta Court of Appeal.