McAlister v. Gallant. 2012 ONCJ 565

The parties had lived together in a common law relationship for about two years. They had a child who was about to enter school.

Proceedings for custody had been commenced by the mother in the Ontario Court of Justice in 2009. Those proceedings were adjourned, however, so the parties could enter mediation.

In 2011, they entered into a typical mediation/arbitration agreement under which L.C. was appointed to mediate their parenting issues. If mediation was unsuccessful, L.C. would arbitrate any parenting issues that remained in dispute.

As the mediation continued, the father grew disenchanted with the process and the mediator. Ultimately, he accused L.C. of bias and refused to participate further. L.C. acknowledged his accusation and suggested that “…a referral to another arbitrator would be appropriate”.

Over the summer of 2012, a dispute arose as to where the child should attend school in the fall. The father wanted the child to continue at a Montessori school where she had attended in the 2011-2012 school term. The mother wanted to enroll the child in a public school.

L.C. declared an impasse in mediation and informed the parties that she would arbitrate the school issue. She set out specific timelines for written submissions. The mother made submissions. The father did not. Through counsel, he informed L.C. that he was going to attempt to have her removed as arbitrator. 

L.C. delivered a decision on the school placement issue on August 28, 2012, deciding that the child should be enrolled in the public school system.

The husband moved, in the existing Ontario Court of Justice application for various heads of relief:................(more)        

http://www.familylawlectures.ca/article/mcalister-v-gallant-2012-oncj-565.html

Outside of Family Court, False Claim of DV Considered Perjury

We see false claims of domestic violence in family courts every day. For decades now, attorneys in family courts have been telling us that claims of domestic violence are routinely made to gain an advantage in custody cases. That’s another way of saying that many of those claims are made up. But of course, those claims will continue to be made for the good and sufficient reason that they work. They achieve the desired result – separate the other parent (almost invariably the father) from the child. Once that’s accomplished with a temporary order, it becomes much easier to make sole maternal custody permanent. After all, the child hasn’t seen his/her father since the start of the divorce action, so why change that when the permanent orders are made?

But what’s always amazed me and countless other observers of family courts is the utter failure of family court judges to care that they’re being lied to. As routine as those false claims of domestic abuse are, they’d be squelched in an instant if judges started using the powers they’ve always had to punish perjurers. The fact that they don’t is one of the many disgraces that hang around the neck of family law in this country like scarlett letters.