Please note that the information provided herein is not legal advice and is provided for informational and educational purposes only.  If you need legal advice with respect to getting, varying, or terminating child support in Ontario, you should seek professional assistance (e.g. make a post on Dynamic Lawyers).  We have Toronto, Ottawa, Brampton, Hamilton, and other Ontario family law lawyers registered on Dynamic Lawyers who can offer information, advice, and assistance with respect to helping you get, vary, or terminate child support.

Following up on my recent blog on child support obligations in Ontario, I thought I’d discuss an obvious limitation on those obligations: the exception in section 31(2) of the Family Law Act that says that a parent’s obligation to pay child support “does not extend to a child who is sixteen years of age or older and has withdrawn from parental control”.

So what exactly does it mean for a child to withdraw from parental control?  The legislation is silent, so it’s up to the courts to interpret that section.  Here are some of the principles which courts have previously come up with to decide cases…

• Whether a child has “withdrawn from parental control” is a question of fact.  Parental control is a concept, the interpretation of which depends upon an assessment of all relevant circumstances, including the age and maturity of the child.
• Section 31(1) of the Act has been given a narrow interpretation and applies only to those cases where the child has voluntarily and of his or her own free will removed herself or himself from a circumstance which cannot be classed as unreasonable. Where the child is forced out by unreasonable rules, restrictions or relationships within the family unit, s. 31(1) will not apply and support may be awarded. Where, however, the child is living away from home at university and is not subject to any parental control, it may be that she or he falls within the scope of the provision. If one or both of the parents purposefully terminates support obligations, thereby requiring the child out of necessity to live independently or obtain financial assistance from a third party, then the child could nevertheless be deemed to be dependent and child support may be ordered.
• Notwithstanding that a child may no longer be under the parental control of one parent, that parent will still be obliged to provide child support if the child is under the parental control of the other parent.
• The courts have generally terminated child support in cases where the child has established an independent life, residence, and source of income.
• Once the parent has established that the child has withdrawn from parental control, the onus then shifts to the child to prove that the departure occurred involuntarily by reason, for example, of eviction or a living situation with the parent that is viewed as unbearable or impossible.

The following Ontario cases illustrate how some courts have interpreted the defence of withdrawal from parental control under s. 31(2) of the Act:

In Fitzpatrick v. Karlein, (1994) 5 R.F.L. (4th) 290, a child brought a motion for interim financial support from her mother. For most of her life, the child was in her mother’s exclusive custody. Since her mother’s remarriage, the child had felt unloved in the cold and rejecting atmosphere created by her mother and stepfather, where she was criticized, taunted, and felt cut off from the other members of the family. With emotional support from her father and maternal grandparents, the child, at age 17, left her mother’s home to reside with the parents of a friend. The Ontario Court of Justice (Provincial Division) rejected the child’s motion for support on the basis that the child had voluntarily withdrawn from parental control. In reaching that conclusion, Nasmith Prov. J. wrote:

20 While I have sympathy for Carolyn [the child] and I understand her preference for living with the Bowens, she has not demonstrated that the living situation with her mother and Mr. Karlein was unbearable or impossible.  She has shown that she was unhappy there; that she felt unloved; that she was feeling cut off from other members of the family. Her choice to move out made good sense to her. But it was a relatively free choice as it has been presented. Carolyn has not satisfied me that her withdrawal from her mother’s control was involuntary.

21 Accordingly, the defence under subs. 31(2) of the Family Law Act is available to the mother and she cannot be ordered to contribute to her daughter’s support.

In Bertram v. Bertram, a child brought an application for support from her parents when she was 17 years old and living on student welfare in her own apartment and attending high school as a full-time student. Nasmith Prov. J. dismissed the application on the basis that the child had withdrawn from parental control. The evidence revealed that the child had experienced some difficulties with her mother (with whom she was previously residing) which led her to choose to live on her own. The situation was far from unbearable and the choice was a relatively free one. As such, s. 31(2) applied to block court-ordered support from her parents. Worth mentioning is that Nasmith Prov. J. emphasized the voluntary nature of the withdrawal as a requirement to the s. 31(2) defence:

7 …The case law confirms that the defence of withdrawal under section 31 is not available to a parent unless the withdrawal from parental control has been voluntary on the child’s part. If the child has been forced out of the home or has left because conditions are seen as intolerable, the withdrawal will be viewed as involuntary and the defence will fail.

8 In Haskell v. Letourneau (1979), 25 O.R. (2d) 139, 100 D.L.R. (3d) 329, 1 F.L.R.A.C. 306 (Ont. Co. Ct.), for example, County Court Judge Clements stated at page 151 [O.R.]:

If the child is driven from parental control by the emotional or physical abuse in the home … the choice of leaving was not voluntary…

9 The need for a withdrawal that is voluntary was confirmed by Provincial Judge Weisman in Dolabaille v. Carrington (1981), 32 O.R. (2d) 442, 21 R.F.L. (2d) 207 (Ont. Prov. Ct., Fam. Div.); by Provincial Judge Thomson in Distefano v. Haroutunian and Haroutunian (1984), 41 R.F.L. (2d) 201 (Ont. Prov. Ct., Fam. Div.); by Provincial Judge King in Zedner v. Zedner and Jackson (1989) 22 R.F.L. (3d) 207; by Justice Fitzgerald in Figueiredo v. Figueiredo (1991), 33 R.F.L. (3d) 72 (Ont. Gen. Div.); and by Provincial Judge Pedlar in Lyttle v. Lyttle (1992), 41 R.F.L. (3d) 422 (Ont. Prov. Div.). To be disentitled to support by reason of withdrawal from parental control, the withdrawal must be viewed as voluntary.

In Giess v. Upper, a mother applied for child support for her then 19 year old daughter.  The Ontario Court of Justice – General Division found that the child was enrolled in a full time program of education; as such, the father had an obligation to provide child support – subject to whether the child had withdrawn from parental control. Mendes da Costa J. held that, while the child had withdrawn from the parental control of her father, she had not withdrawn from the parental control of her mother; as such, her father was still obliged to pay child support. Mendes da Costa J.’s reasoning is worth mentioning here:

30 Whether Elizabeth [i.e. the child] has “withdrawn from parental control”, within the meaning of the legislation, raises a question of fact. Parental control is a concept, the interpretation of which depends upon an assessment of all relevant circumstances, including the age and maturity of the child.

31 I find that Elizabeth remains under the parental control of her mother, but that she is no longer under the parental control of her father.

32 I have sketched the little evidence that was adduced surrounding Elizabeth’s departure from her father’s home. The evidence is meagre. On the present state of the evidence, I find that the parent/child relationship between Elizabeth and her father was terminated by Elizabeth, without, so far as I can tell, any good reason: at least, and perhaps I should put the matter this way, no evidence of good reason was adduced before me.

33 Section 31(2) provides, in part, that the support obligation does not extend to a child who has “withdrawn from parental control”. The legislation contemplates that child support issues may arise where parents have separated, and where a child resides with only one parent. The Act does not require, for the support obligation to exist, that the child must continue to be under the parental control of both parents. To construe the legislation in this fashion would require reading into the section words that are not there, and would, I believe, frustrate, in a substantial manner, the objectives and spirit of the Act.

34 On this reasoning, I find that Elizabeth has not “withdrawn from parental control” within the meaning of section 31(2).

In Bunnell v. Bunnell, [1996] W.D.F.L. 2213, the mother of a 19 year old child (who was attending community college away from his parents) sought to terminate child support payments on the basis that there was a complete breakdown of the mother/child relationship. The Ontario General Division disagreed and found that the child had not withdrawn from parental control despite their lack of contact and the fact that the child lived with his father during only part of the year. Perkins J. commented that no authority had been cited by the mother to support the proposition that withdrawal from the mother’s authority alone constituted withdrawal from parental control within the meaning of s. 31(2) of the Act. Perkins J. held that, since the child had not withdrawn from his father’s control, s. 31(2) of the Act did not preclude the mother from paying child support.

In Power v. Power, 1997 CarswellOnt 4492, an application was brought by the mother for child support from the father. By the time the application was heard, the daughter lived with neither of her parents, was employed, and received no financial support from either of them. Ferguson J. found that the daughter had “withdrawn at least temporarily from parental control and is not entitled to support. She may be entitled to support in the future if she returns to live with either parent or attends school.”

In Simpson v. Hart, 1998 CarswellOnt 5163, the father of a 21 year old daughter brought an application to terminate child support. The 21 year old daughter had a daughter of her own, had been receiving a full Mother’s Allowance, and had continued to live in her mother’s home (which had been renovated into two apartments and she receives $500 per month as a rent allowance in addition to the balance of the government stipend). The Ontario Court of Justice – General Division found that the daughter had been “living independently from her mother including, more recently, in totally separate accommodation in the mother’s house and for which the mother receives $500 a month rent.” Dunbar J. held that, given the financial and physical independence of the daughter from her mother, it was not appropriate for support to be continued to be paid by the father to the mother on the daughter’s behalf.

In Belanger v. Belanger, [2005] W.D.F.L. 3583, the grandparents of two children (both over the age of 16 and residing with them) brought an application for the father to pay child support. The Ontario Superior Court of Justice disagreed and dismissed the application on the basis that the children had withdrawn from parental control voluntarily. Cavarzan J. held that there was “no evidence of physical or psychological abuse which would make [the children] withdraw from parental control involuntarily”. Rather, Cavarzan J. wrote, the children had chosen to live with their grandparents to avoid submitting to the reasonable discipline imposed by their custodial parents and because of material benefits that the grandparents could afford them which their parents could not.

Finally, in Cox v. Gummer, [2007] W.D.F.L. 689, the father of a 19 and a half year old child brought a motion to terminate support payments. The motion was based on the child’s age, the fact that the child no longer resided with the mother, the fact that the child was not in school, and the child’s poor history of school attendance. The Ontario Court of Justice agreed with the father and terminated support payments under the Act. Specifically, Baldock J. held that the child ceased to be under the control of her parents when she left her mother’s home at age seventeen and established a separate residence: “She has established an independent life, residence and source of income. Whatever moral obligation the parents may have to assist her financially thereafter, there is no legal requirement to do so”. Baldock J. further held that the issue of whether the child was in school was irrelevant. The father was entitled to recover any overpayment and any money held by the Family Responsibility Office was to be refunded to the father immediately.

written by admin \\ tags: child support in ontario, child support obligations, family law act, family law lawyer, family law lawyers, ontario family law, sixteen years

Please note that the information provided herein is not legal advice and is provided for informational and educational purposes only.  If you need legal advice with respect to getting a marriage contract or prenuptial agreement in Ontario, you should seek professional assistance (e.g. make a post on Dynamic Lawyers).  We have Toronto and Ottawa family law lawyers registered on Dynamic Lawyers who can offer information, advice, and assistance with respect to your marriage contracts and prenuptial agreements.

In this blog, I thought I’d talk about marriage contracts, which are often referred to as prenuptial agreements (but this is only the case if the marriage has not been entered into yet).

What are they?
Marriage contracts help parties who are going to get married or who are married arrange their financial affairs in case of a separation.  Marriage contracts are made by parties in the following typical situations:

• the parties intend to marry each other;
• the parties have been married before, have children from previous marriages and want to ensure that their financial affairs will not be affected by the marriage;
• the parties are married but one of whom is about to receive an inheritance;
• the parties are married but want to exclude one of the party’s property from net family property in the event of death, separation, or termination of the marriage.

What are the benefits of having one?
Without a marriage contract in place, if spouses separate, then the applicable federal and provincial legislation will apply to divide their finances.  In Ontario, this is done by dividing a pool of funds called “net family property”.  It’s called “net” because you subtract the worth of each spouse on or at the date of marriage.  Hence, the net family property is the increase of net worth of the spouses since the marriage.  After this figure is determined, it is equalized and each spouse is entitled to half.

Having a marriage contract gives the parties certainty, predictability, and control over their financial arrangements in the case of a separation.  While things like spousal support, assets and properties can be dealt with in a marriage contract, anything to do with children of the marriage or possession of the matrimonial home cannot be contracted for.  Overall, a clear and fair marriage contract can make separation and divorce much cleaner and cheaper (by avoiding acrimonious litigation!).

What are the legal requirements to have one?
There are three basic requirements for a marriage contract or prenuptial agreement to be validly binding:

1. The parties must make full disclosure of their financial assets, liabilities, income and expenses.
2. The contract must be in writing and signed by each party before a witness.
3. The contract must be entered into voluntarily and not under any duress, undue influence, etc.

It is advisable that each party retain separate counsel to protect their rights and promote their interests.  Family law lawyers can help draft, negotiate, and explain marriage contracts to you.  The last thing you want is for the marriage to breakdown and a spouse to claim that he or she did not understand the marriage contract, entered into under duress, did not understand it, and did not receive independent legal advice concerning it!

written by admin \\ tags: family law lawyer, marriage contracts, prenuptials

I thought it would be worthwhile to put together a list of 10 FREE and useful resources for individuals involved in family law matters in Ontario.  These resources include relevant laws, forms, and websites.  Please keep in mind that, if you need a Toronto or Ottawa family law lawyer to advise or represent you, you should go to Dynamic Lawyers and make a post.  Toronto and Ottawa family law lawyers will respond to you by e-mail with free information and quotes on your particular matter.  You’ll notice that the general trend in family law matters has been to offer self-represented litigants guides, kits, workshops, seminars, forms, etc. to cut down their legal costs and provide them with better access to justice.  So, without further adieu, here’s my list of family law resources in Ontario:

1. Family Law Court Forms
2. Family Law Guides, courtesy of the Ministry of the Attorney General
3. Ontario and Federal Family Law Legislation, courtesy of the Ministry of the Attorney General
4. Divorce Advice Ontario
5. My Ontario Divorce
6. Community Legal Education Ontario (CLEO)
   
7. CLEO Family Law Resources in Ontario
8. Legal Aid Ontario
9. Joel Miller’s Family Law Centre at Ricketts, Harris LLP
   
10. Law Society of Upper Canada’s Practice Portal for Family Law

written by admin \\ tags: attorney general ontario, community legal education, divorce advice, family law lawyer, family law legislation, family law matters, family law ontario, family law resources, law society of upper canada, legal aid ontario, ministry of the attorney general, ontario, ontario divorce, ontario family law, ontario legal aid

A few months ago, I had the pleasure of meeting up with the founders (Steven Bookman and Jeremy Loeb) of Divorce-Advice-Ontario, a newish website that offers unbundled legal services for Ontario divorces.  Experienced family law lawyer Steven Bookman (who has over 30 years practicing family law in Ontario) leads a team of law clerks, lawyers, psychologists and family counsellors at the The Hope Centre for Family Law in Toronto, Ontario.  The Centre strives to help self represented divorce and family law litigants gain reasonable access to the legal system.  Last year, the Centre’s team launched Divorce-Advice-Ontario under the direction of Jeremy Loeb.  The website and the team offer members and website users with kits, seminars, workshops, useful links, videos, divorce forms, divorce laws, and ask a lawyer services.  All in all, a very good resource that do-it-yourselfers going through a divorce should consider.

written by admin \\ tags: divorce advice, divorces, family counsellors, family law in ontario, family law in toronto, family law lawyer, hope centre, lawyer services, psychologists, reasonable access, toronto ontario

Although I’m not a family law lawyer per se, I often get asked the question: “How does emancipation work in the context of child support obligations?”.  I think the better way of asking this question is: “How can I end my child support obligations?”.  You see, I’ve researched Ontario and Federal laws and court cases and the term “emancipation” just doesn’t seem to appear anywhere.  The term ‘emancipation’ is more of an American term and one which Ontario family law lawyers may not be familiar with it.

If you’d like to know more about ending child support, you should basically be asking for two things on Dynamic Lawyers: (1) what does the law say about how to end child support and (2) what procedural steps need to be taken to go about ending child support?

With respect to the first question, the answer is based on which laws (i.e. statutes, regulations, and cases, etc.) apply to your situation and those depend on where you live.  If you live in Toronto or Ottawa, for example, you should go to Dynamic Lawyers and make a post (it’s 100% FREE and Anonymous) and have local family law lawyers respond to your inquiry.  Once the Toronto or Ottawa family law lawyer has been retained and understand your situation, he or she can explain to you what the law says about ending child support (a.k.a. being emancipated from child support).

In terms of answering the second question, the proper procedure (although I haven’t done it myself) in Ontario appears to be to bring a motion to ask the court to vary a court order previously made requiring you to pay child support. This assumes that there was a court order requiring you to pay child support.  You or your lawyer would do things like prepare the motion materials, serve them on the other parties, and file them with the court; thereafter, the parties would attend a case conference, then a settlement conference, then a trial scheduling conference, and then finally go to trial to argue the motion. For each of the conferences, you’ll need to prepare, serve, and file briefs and financial statements. Before trial, you’ll also need to prepare a trial brief. All of this procedural stuff and documentation takes a lot of time to prepare, review, serve, and file. While you can save money by doing it yourself (the court forms are online and so too are the Family Law Rules and the Family Law Act), it’ll take up a lot of your time and you might end up being penalized finally in costs for failing to do something.

Finally, this whole process could take many months, if not years.  I know it sounds discouraging, but that’s the reality of bringing a motion to vary a court order requiring child support payments.

The bottom line is that you should definitely know if you have a good substantive case in law before you set out procedurally to bring the motion (and spend thousands on lawyers and put yourself at risk of losing thousands in legal costs for the other side if you lose!).  Go to Dynamic Lawyers and make a post to get free quotes from Toronto and Ottawa lawyers!

written by admin \\ tags: case conference, child support obligations, court cases, emancipation, family law lawyer, family law lawyers, ontario family law, ottawa, ottawa family law, ottawa family law lawyers, toronto, toronto family law

Please note that the information provided herein is not legal advice and is provided for informational and educational purposes only.  If you need legal advice with respect to child support or determining child support payments, you should seek professional assistance (e.g. make a post on Dynamic Lawyers).  We have Toronto and Ottawa family law lawyers registered on Dynamic Lawyers who can offer information, advice, and assistance with respect to your child support matters.

As a follow up to my recent child support calculator blog (which dealt with Ontario and federal child support), I thought I’d discuss calculating child support in British Columbia.  Interestingly, the province of British Columbia has adopted the Federal Child Support Guidelines to determine child support obligations in that province.  It says so here: s. 1(2) of the B.C. Child Support Guidelines Regulation made under the Family Relations Act.   So here it is:

• British Columbia – this is a calculator provided by the British Columbia Family Maintenance Enforcement Program.  Please keep in mind that this websites may not be up-to-date and that you are always cautioned to consult with a family law lawyer who is apprised of the present law in British Columbia.

The key thing to keep in mind is trying to figure out what your income would be for the purposes of determining child support.  It’s not as easy or straightforward as one might think.  There are a number of steps that begin with looking at your last income tax return and making adjustments according to the Federal Child Support Guidelines.

The Federal Child Support Guidelines are regulations made under the Canada Divorce Act. The latter applies when parents are married and are now divorcing or formerly married and making a claim for child support.  If the parents are not divorcing or were not married at all, then child support would have to be calculated by the provincial jurisdiction’s relevant family law legislation.

In Ontario, for example, child support is determined according to the Family Law Act and the Ontario Child Support Guidelines.  The latter also has a table (as does the Federal Child Support Guidelines) that allows users to pinpoint what their child support obligations would be based on their income.

Again, it is encouraged to consult with a family law lawyer (e.g. by making a post on Dynamic Lawyers) before simply assuming that you know what your income would be under the applicable child support guidelines (and possibly relying on a free child support calculator to your detriment).

written by admin \\ tags: blog, british maintenance enforcement program, child support calculator, child support guidelines, child support obligations, child support payments, divorce act, family, family law lawyer, family law legislation, family maintenance enforcement, federal child support guidelines, law, lawyer, lawyers, maintenance enforcement program, ontario

There are a number of lawyers and law firms in Ottawa that strictly practice family law.  FYI, family law in Ottawa is not really that different from family law elsewhere in Ontario.  The Ontario Child Support Guidelines, Ontario Family Law Act, and the Ontario Family Law Rules all apply – irrespective of the Ontario city in which you reside.  If you need an Ottawa family law lawyer, you should go to Dynamic Lawyers and make a post.  It’s 100% FREE and ANONYMOUS and family law lawyers in Ottawa will respond to you via e-mail with information and quotes.

Please note that the following is being provided for informative and educational purposes only.  If you require an Ottawa family law lawyer to discuss your concerns and particular case, you are once again encouraged to go to Dynamic Lawyers and make a post.

Notably, because family law deals with high tension, stress, and emotional issues involving couples, children, and property, the justice system (i.e. the government which makes the laws and the courts which enforce them) has taken the approach that alternative dispute resolution is generally better suited to deal with these issues than litigation.

Case in point, under s. 9 of the Federal Divorce Act, a lawyer has a duty in divorce proceedings to draw his or her client’s attention to those provisions of that Act that have as their object the reconciliation of spouses and to discuss with them the possibility of the reconciliation (e.g. through counseling, guidance facilities, etc.).  The lawyer must also provide a certificate (i.e. a written statement) to the court upon commencing divorce proceedings that he or she has complied with said duty.

Under s. 10 of that Act, the court itself has a duty – before considering the evidence – to satisfy itself that there is no possibility of the reconciliation of the spouses (unless it would be clearly inappropriate to do so).  The court may even adjourn at any stage in a divorce proceeding if it appears from the nature of the case, the evidence, or the attitude of the spouses that there is a possibility of reconciliation.

Finally, even throughout litigation under the Ontario Family Law Act (e.g. dealing with non-married couples), before trial, there are mandatory case conferences and settlement conferences wherein the parties must attend to try to settle the case before it gets to trial.

These days, collaboration, mediation, and alternative dispute resolution are all buzzwords that Ottawa family law lawyers use to help their clients resolve contentious family law issues.  Family law centres, seminars, counseling, articles, and other alternative outlets are being used to spread the message: divorce doesn’t have to be so ugly and there is a life after it for all of the parties involved!

written by admin \\ tags: alternative dispute resolution, child support guidelines, child support guidelines ontario, divorce proceedings, family law act, family law lawyer, lawyers in ottawa, ontario, ontario child support, ontario family law, ottawa, ottawa family law, ottawa family lawyer

As a follow up to my blog about unbundled legal services in Canada, I thought I’d mention what Canada’s top judge has said about it.  Recall from my previous blog that unbundled legal services are legal services offered by lawyers to allow clients to pay less by doing some of the work themselves.  An example of this is www.MyOntarioDivorce.com (headed up by family law lawyer Robert Berman), which I previously blogged about.

In an article by Janice Tibbetts entitled “Top judge weighs in on legal fees; Suggests defraying costs as more choose to self-represent” (Ottawa Citizen, 9 February 2009), the author reviewed what Chief Justice Beverley McLachlin had discussed about unbundled legal services in a speech at a Vancouver legal conference.  The Chief Justice – a long time advocate of access to justice – was talking about the growing number of Canadians representing themselves in court and what the future prospects of unbundled legal services offered.  She acknowledged that unbundled legal services were being used on a larger scale in the U.S.  She cautioned, however, that it could lead to problems such as “lawyer’s liability for services tat may be rendered without knowing all the facts”.  These things being said, she said it was still worth looking into.

It now appears as though Ontario courts are the pioneers who are here to help self-represented litigants (likely because they see the most immediate benefits through reduced backlog).  For example, Pro Bono Law Ontario has set up offices in court houses to help self-represented litigants.  Ontario court forms and guides are available online.   That being said, the courts can’t do it alone (due to limited resources, red-tape, defined mandate, etc.).  It’s now time for the private sector to play catch-up and give some serious thought into providing innovative services to those who can’t afford hundreds of dollars per hour for a  lawyer.

written by admin \\ tags: beverley mclachlin, family law lawyer, lawyers, ontario court forms, ontario courts, private sector, pro bono law ontario, unbundled legal services

In this week’s Law Times, Robert Todd interviewed Toronto family law lawyer Robert Berman about his website, MyOntarioDivorce.com.  The website helps self-represented litigants in divorce matters (of which there are many) obtain low-cost and automatically-generated court forms for divorce cases.

Berman came up with the idea about a year and a half ago while observing how self-represented litigants who couldn’t afford lawyers were being treated in court by judges and court staff.  He envisioned a free website full of information and links to help every day people get help about the divorce process and relevant family law legislation.

After hiring a computer programmer and spending over $100,000, the website officially launched in mid-february this year.  The response has been “overwhelming” according to Bermann.  The website allows individuals to pay anywhere from $100 to $850 / month to fill out an online questionaire and generate court-forms (e.g. motions, reply, conference briefs, etc.).  According to Berman, the same service from a lawyer would cost from $2,500 to $4,000.

Berman – a longstanding family law lawyer who practices out of his firm, Berman Barristers – is crusading for better access to justice in the family law arena through the unbundling of legal services (which I have previously blogged about).

written by admin \\ tags: barristers, briefs, computer programmer, court, court staff, divorce cases, divorce matters, family law lawyer, family law legislation, family law myontariodivorce.com, free website, judges, lawyer, lawyers, litigants, ontario divorce, questionaire, relevant family, Rob Berman, robert berman, self-represented, toronto, unbundled legal services, unbundling, undbundling legal services

Types of lawyers.  There are lots in Toronto (as in every major city across North America).  Each has his or her own specialty.  The day of the general practitioner is not as it once was (and is slowly fading away).  In fact, specialization is a preferred strategy to earn above-average returns in any given industry.  Besides, think of how hard it would be for a lawyer who ‘does it all’ to keep up to date with the changing laws in every given legal area.  It’s way too difficult and that’s where negligence cases may arise.

In any event, I thought I’d spend some time discussing the various types of lawyers that you can come across on a day-to-day basis.  Here’s the first breakdown of types of lawyers in Toronto (please keep in mind that this list of the types of lawyers out there is not exhaustive):

• Toronto Real Estate Lawyers: help you buy and sell residential, investment, farm, cottage, recreational, condominium, and cooperative properties.  They also you get a mortgage financing and refinancing as well.

• Toronto Personal Injury Lawyers: help you litigate, settle, or otherwise resolve claims arising from:
  • accident benefits claims
  • dog bites
  • disability claims
  • medical malpractice
  • motor vehicle accidents
  • negligence actions
  • personal injury claims
  • product liability
  • slip and falls

• Toronto Business lawyers: help you to incorporate and organize, merge/amalgamate, and dissolve your business.  They can help prepare, review, interpret, revise, negotiate, litigate, and resolve the following business documents:
  • shareholder agreement
  • partnership agreement
  • joint venture agreement
  • franchise agreement
  • commercial leases
  • business acquisitions
  • regulatory compliance
  • constructions contracts
  • employment agreements

• Toronto Wills and Estates Lawyers: they offer services from a basic will and powers of attorney  to more complicated tax-planning structures, such as inter-vivos trusts and estates freezes.  They can also help personal representatives in the administration and distribution of estate assets.  Finally, they can litigate on behalf of beneficiaries or the estate trustee on issues such as mental capacity of the testator, validity of a will, etc.

• Toronto Family Lawyers: they can help you with your marriage breakup by drafting a separation agreement.  They can also help you with issues such as divorce, spousal and child support, child custody, possession of the matrimonial home, and the equalization of net family property.
  

• Toronto Criminal Defense Lawyers: they can help represent you against government bodies that have charged you with criminal or provincial offences (e.g. careless driving), including:
  • DUI (driving under the influence)
  • assault
  • sexual assault
  • fraud
  • theft

written by admin \\ tags: accident, accidents, business acquisitions, business lawyers, businessdefense, commercial leases, criminal, custody, family law lawyer, franchise agreement, injuries, injury, investment farm, joint venture agreement, lawyer, lawyers, lawyers in Toronto, litigants, marriage, negligence, negligence actions, negligence cases, negotiating, Negotiations, offence, partnership, personal injury claims, personal injury lawyers, personallawyer, real estate lawyers, separation, shareholder agreement, toronto, toronto motor vehicle accidents, toronto business, toronto personal injury, Toronto real estate Types of Lawyers, trusts and estates, vivos trusts, Wills and Estates