#ThrowbackThursday: Pre-Divorce Act Divorces

As I wrap up Throwback Thursday Family Law month, I had to include this little piece of history I learned about one day while going through old Statutes of Canada. This may be old news to many of you, but I thought it was quite interesting. As too did Library and Archives Canada, since I’m going to shamelessly steal text from them for this:

The first federal Divorce Act was passed by Parliament in 1968, establishing a uniform divorce law across Canada. Before that, there were different laws relating to divorce in different provinces.

From 1840 to 1968, many divorces in Canada were granted by private acts of the Parliament of Canada. Before 1867, only five divorce acts were passed and published either in the Statutes of the Province of Canada or in the Journals of the Legislative Assembly of the Province of Canada.

From 1867 to 1968, in some provinces a person wishing to obtain a divorce was first required to place a notice of intent to petition the government for an Act of Divorce in the Canada Gazette and in two newspapers in the district or county where the petitioner resided. It was to appear for a six-month period.

The petition would contain details such as the date and place of the marriage, and events surrounding the demise of the marriage. In the case of adultery or bigamy, a co-respondent was often named. If the petition was allowed, Parliament would pass an Act of Divorce nullifying the marriage.

Between 1867 and 1963, a transcript of the Act was published in the Statutes of Canada for the current year. Between 1964 and 1968, the transcript was published in the Journals of the Senate of Canada.

For more from Library and Archives Canada, click here.


Ottawa Blog Roll: April 2017

Please find below links to blog posts or articles authored by the Ottawa legal community in April.

Civil Litigation

Contingency Fees
– Bryan Delaney, Delaney’s Law Firm

Changes to the Ontario Insurance Act that will directly impact on your Auto Insurance Benefits – Consumers Beware
– Kevin Cantor, Mann Lawyers

Distracted Driving: Still the #1 Cause of Road Fatalities in Ontario
– Frank Van Dyke, Van Dyke Injury Law Blog

Condominium Law

Is your Condo Ready for the Legalization of Marijuana?
– Rod Escayola, Condo Adviser

Condo Arrears Include Legal Fees
– Jocelyn Duquette, Condo Adviser

The Final Version of the Licensing Regulations for Condo Managers is Officially Out!
– Rod Escayola, Condo Adviser

Corporate Commercial Law

Federal Not-for-Profit Corporations: Board Removal – No; Board Suspension – Yes
– Michael A. Chambers, Maclaren Corlett

Securities Alert – Social Media Tips for Reporting Issuers
– Perley-Robertson, Hill & McDougall LLP

Criminal Law

Lessons For Canada From 13th
– Anne Marie McElroy, McElroy Law

Police Accountability: There is No Right to Silence
– Michael Spratt, Abergel Goldstein & Partners LLP

Common Privacy?
– Dallas Mack, Mack’s Criminal Law

Privacy Limitations Defined
– Dallas Mack, Mack’s Criminal Law

March Criminal Law Round-Up
– Anne Marie McElroy, McElroy Law

Employment & Labour Law

Women Without Heels and Full Makeup Need Not Apply
– Dana Du Perron, Nelligan O’Brien Payne

Solidarity and Sacrifice: US Athletes Fight For Equality
– Andrew Reinholdt, Nelligan O’Brien Payne

Wrongful dismissal – when does the limitation period clock start running?
– Andrew Vey, Vey Willetts LLP

Termination Clause Unenforceable due to ‘Potential Violation’ of Minimum Standards
– Paul Willetts, Vey Willetts LLP

Continue Reading…


Recently Published Ottawa Decisions

Find below recently published Ottawa decisions, available for free through CanLII.org.

Family Matters

Himyary v Al-Yasiri (2017 ONSC 2340)
costs — father — motion — offers to settle — custody
Justice L. Sheard

Alwan v Aulaiwi (2017 ONSC 2309)
motion — third-party record holders — extend the time — leave — third-party disclosure
Justice R. Beaudoin

Children’s Aid Society of Ottawa v M.L. (2017 ONSC 2284)
child — care — father — home — paternal
Justice M. Shelston

Verhey v Verhey (2017 ONSC 2216)
spousal support — income — postsecondary — tuition — child support
Justice M. Shelston

Lundy v Lundy (2017 ONSC 2101)
co-estate trustee — estate — equalization — surviving spouse — incurred in good faith
Justice L. Sheard

Lockman v Rancourt (2017 ONSC 2274)
arbitration — peremptory — email — request for an adjournment — lawyer
Justice T. Engelking

Szonyi v Szonyi (2017 ONSC 2171)
procedural motion — substantial indemnity — endorsement — minutes of settlement — costs
Justice S. Corthorn

Civil Matters

Ramsarran v Assaly Asset Management Corporation (2017 ONSC 2394)
resort to the attenuated process — pleading — requisition — apparent on the face — vexatious
Justice R. Beaudoin

Continue Reading…


New Titles – April 2017

Here is a list of new titles we’ve recently added to the library collection. Among them are a number of titles from the popular Irwin Law books, including new editions of The Charter of Rights and Freedoms, Constitutional Law, and Detention and Arrest, as well as the new release Land-Use Planning. They can be found in the New Books section behind the Reference Desk.

The 2017 Annotated Ontario Personal Property Security Act (Carswell)

Annotated Canada Pension Plan and Old Age Security Act, 16th Edition (LexisNexis)

The Annotated Ontario Consumer Protection Act 2017 (LexisNexis)

Business Law in Ontario, 2nd Edition (LexisNexis)

The Charter of Rights and Freedoms, 6th Edition (Irwin Law)

Competition and Antitrust Laws in Canada: Mergers, Joint Ventures and Competitor Collaborations, 2nd Edition (LexisNexis)

Constitutional Law, 5th Edition (Irwin Law)

Detention and Arrest, 2nd Edition (Irwin Law)

Land-Use Planning (Irwin Law)

Ontario Municipal Legislation 2017 (Canada Law Book)

The Ontario Municipal Service Directory: A Comprehensive Guide for Real Estate Professionals 2017 (Carswell)

Pocket Ontario OH&S Act & Regulations 2017 (Carswell)

Sale of a Business, 11th Edition (LexisNexis)

Stikeman Income Tax Act Annotated 2017, 61st Edition (Carswell)

Supreme Court of Canada Practice 2017 (Carswell)


Newly Received Materials from LSUC CPD

Below are some of the most recent CPD materials added to the library collection. Each title links to the book record where you can view more details and the full table of contents. All materials are available in print at the library, or if you’re interested in only a couple of articles, feel free to email us a request for a scanned copy.

Family Law Practice Basics 2017 (Feb. 21, 2017)

  • Most common questions your clients will ask / Jennifer Brithaupt
  • Techniques for taking instructions and advising your client / Braham D. Siegel
  • A guide to preparing an annotated financial statement / Cheryl Suan Williams
  • The latest developments in family law / Constance Nielsen

The Six-Minute Commercial Leasing Lawyer 2017 (Feb. 22, 2017)

  • Conditions for tenant possession / Jordan Hill
  • Drafting “fair market rent” for renewals / Christina Kobi
  • Are you afraid of the dark? Tenant “go dark” rights / Melissa McBain and Jenna Morley

21st Annual Intellectual Property Law : The Year in Review (Jan. 19-20, 2017)

  • Trademarks update / Georgina Starkman Danzing
  • Copyright developments – 2016 / Kevin Sartorio and Margot Patterson
  • Litigation funding roundtable: the Canadian perspective / Naomi Leowith
  • Trademarks: year in review 2016 / Robert A. MacDonald

Taxation Issues for Real Estate Lawyers 2016 (Nov. 8, 2016)

  • The tax treatment of lease guarantees / Chris Anderson
  • Estate planning for real estate / Maureen Berry
  • Repercussions of the Panama papers: looking out for number one (and your client) / Robin MacKnight

#ThrowbackThursday: Family Law 1992

As mentioned last week, this month for Throwback Thursday, we’re looking at past family law conferences put on by the CCLA. This week’s entry is the program from our first official Annual Institute of Family Law. This seminar was held in May 1992, and though this schedule doesn’t indicate the location, it was held at the Faculty of Law at the University of Ottawa. Fun fact: this conference was actually jointly sponsored by the Faculty of Law at the University.

 

 


Recently Published Ottawa Decisions

Find below recently published Ottawa decisions, available for free through CanLII.org.

Family Matters

Campbell v Campbell (2017 ONSC 2139)
estate — will — bifurcation — application — rules
Justice C. MacLeod

Szonyi v Szonyi (2017 ONSC 2171)
procedural motion — substantial indemnity — endorsement — minutes of settlement — costs
Justice S. Corthorn

Boyer v Brown (2017 ONSC 2047)
child support — costs — motion — arrears — offer
Justice L. Sheard

Derakhshan v Narula (2017 ONSC 1996)
motions — costs — time spent — summonses — hours
Justice L. Sheard

Derakhshan v Narula (2017 ONSC 1999)
motions — hours — spent — time — bad faith
Justice L. Sheard

Derakhshan v Narula (2017 ONSC 2053)
enough assets in to pay — motion — security for costs — waste of time — nuisance
Justice L. Sheard

Arnold v Deere (2017 ONSC 1936)
disclosure — orders — justly — finds — uncontested
Justice S. Kershman

Uriu v Rivadeneyra (2017 ONSC 1930)
costs — motion — return — parenting — awarded
Justice L. Sheard

Civil Matters

Farley v Ottawa (Police Services Board) (2017 ONSC 2197)
partial indemnity — costs of the motion — allinclusive — fees incurred — mathematical
Justice C. MacLeod

Continue Reading…


#ThrowbackThursday: Family Law 1983

This month, we’ll be holding the 26th Annual Institute of Family Law in Montebello. Accordingly, this month’s Throwbacks will feature programs from past family law conferences. You might be thinking at this point, however, that the title of this post says 1983, which is most definitely older than 26 years. And you’d be right!

A few weeks ago, I noticed a binder for the “Family Law Seminar” from 1983 on the shelf. If anyone can remember from the time what this was about, please leave a comment below! At any rate, what is clear is that before our Annual Institute of Family Law got started in 1992, we at least had this two-day seminar in May 1983 in Mont Ste-Marie. Here’s a look at the agenda:

 


Asked and Answered: O’Brien’s Jury Charges (1998) 1

We’ve had a couple inquiries for the O’Brien’s Jury Charges (also known as Civil Jury Charges) publication at the library now. It was first brought to our attention by a student tasked to find it, as it had been referenced in the case Iannarella v. Corbett, 2015 ONCA 110 (CanLII) as follows:

[8] In charging a jury regarding the onus of proof for rear-end motor vehicle collisions, trial judges often use a variation of the standard liability instruction from O’Brien’s Jury Charges (1998), which provides:

A prudent motorist should drive at such rate of speed with his vehicle under such control that he is able to pull up within the range of his vision. If there is any difficulty in seeing because of weather conditions, then common sense dictates that he should travel more slowly. In other words, “if you can’t see where you’re going don’t go”. If the road is icy or slippery, then even more care should be taken. In a case where a vehicle is struck without the driver of the rear vehicle having seen it until it was too late to avoid a collision, then you should ask yourselves; (1) Was he keeping a proper lookout? (2) If he was keeping the best lookout possible, was he going too fast for the lookout that could be kept in the circumstances?”

Members of the jury, generally speaking, when one car runs into another from behind, in the absence of any excuse for such a collision, the driver of the rear car must satisfy you that the collision did not occur as a result of his negligence.

Not being able to find the publication listed anywhere under that particular name, we began to suspect that perhaps it was associated with our other more prominent precedent set of a similar name, O’Brien’s Encyclopedia of Forms and Precedents. Search as we did though, we could find no evidence to that effect either.

So we starting asking around in our librarian circles. At first, except for references to the publication found in other cases as well, we could find no other trace.

Eventually, Jen managed to connect with someone at the National Judicial Institute, the only place we could find that actually had a copy, who had some more information on this little mystery. There is some question about whether the Jury Charges were written by Judge W. David Griffiths and later updated by Judge Joseph W. O’Brien, or vice versa, but either way it was an older set of charges from the late 1990s that seemingly had not been kept up to date, though still useful and quoted since. Since copyright and ownership was somewhat in question, it was clear that it was to remain an internal document available only to judges.

So while we couldn’t actually get our hands on a copy, we count that as a mystery solved.