Family Law Solutions Foster, Dickson, O'Brien

12/15/2021

We're !

Very competitive overhead and a flexible work environment. If you are looking for a new opportunity, apply via e-mail to [email protected]

12/09/2021

has seriously impacted litigants’ to the . In response to same, the Court of Queen’s Bench announced that, effective January 4, 2022, a *new* URGENT MATTERS CHAMBERS project will be implemented.

This 6-month pilot project targets those who require assistance with Emergency Protection Orders, Restraining Orders, Preservation Orders, or Urgent “Without Notice” Applications. Urgent matters were defined as being those that may result in serious consequences or harm may arise should the hearing not proceed, or if there is a risk, loss of jurisdiction, or expiration of an existing protection / restraining order.

For more information, the announcement can be found on the Court’s website here:

Subscribe to the mailing list to receive notifications via e-mail when new Court of Queen's Bench announcements are posted.  See: Archive of announcements released by the Court.  See: Stories about the Court.

12/03/2021

This was so fun! Thank you to the LESA for hosting this event. For those looking to improve their social media marketing game, check out our interview below.

Are you interested learning more about the opportunities and benefits social media can offer your digital marketing plan?https://www.lesaonline.org/social-media-marketing-tips-for-legal-professionals/

We (virtually) sat down with Brittany Koenig, digital media manager and senior paralegal with Family Law Solutions Foster, Dickson, O'Brien to chat about how to expand your networks to reach new demographics, how to engage with your customers online, and how to cultivate a sense of community within your social networks.

We also talk about the benefits of having a strong social media presence and how you can create a mix of content that adds value to your followers.

Watch the replay here: https://www.lesaonline.org/social-media-marketing-tips-for-legal-professionals/

12/03/2021

Are you interested learning more about the opportunities and benefits social media can offer your digital marketing plan?https://www.lesaonline.org/social-media-marketing-tips-for-legal-professionals/

We (virtually) sat down with Brittany Koenig, digital media manager and senior paralegal with Family Law Solutions Foster, Dickson, O'Brien to chat about how to expand your networks to reach new demographics, how to engage with your customers online, and how to cultivate a sense of community within your social networks.

We also talk about the benefits of having a strong social media presence and how you can create a mix of content that adds value to your followers.

Watch the replay here: https://www.lesaonline.org/social-media-marketing-tips-for-legal-professionals/

12/02/2021

We're doing something we've never done before... we're going LIVE on Thursday at noon MST! Log on to hear a chat about the benefits of a solid social media marketing strategy with Brittany Koenig, senior paralegal and digital media manager at Family Law Solutions Foster, Dickson, O'Brien.

Have you ever wondered how you can engage with your customers online and expand your reach to new demographics? If so, hop on Facebook on Thursday at noon MST to watch our live as we chat all things social media.

12/01/2021

In Keeping v Keeping, 2021 ABQB 892, the brought an emergency application for the return of the after the relocated with the child to the Maritimes.
The parties were in 2018 and there was one child from the . The Divorce Judgment specified that the parents shared custody over the child with the mother having primary parenting and being responsible for the day-to-day decision making in the best interest of the child (para 4).
The Court summarized the timeline of events leading up to the mother’s relocation, confirming that she sent a letter to the father via registered mail on July 15, 2021 notifying him of her intention to move with the child pursuant to Section 16.9 of the , which states:
16.9(1) A person who has time or decision-making responsibility in respect of a child of the marriage and who intends to undertake a relocation shall notify, at least 60-days before the expected date of the proposed and in the form prescribed by the regulations, any other person who has parenting time, decision-making responsibility or under a contact order in respect of that child of their intention.
(2) The notice must set out
a) the expected date of the relocation;
b) the address of the new place of residence and contact information of the person or child, as the case may be;
c) a proposal as to how parenting time, decision-making responsibility or contact, as the case may be, could be exercised; and
d) any other information prescribed by the regulations.
Justice Leonard found that the father “chose not to participate in the process” (para 44) and that his refusal to engage in the process “places the burden on the relocating parent and undermines the predictability of the codified relocation notification process” (para 45).
Summarily, Justice Leonard dismissed the Father’s application on the grounds that the mother had complied with the provisions of the Divorce Act, having provided sufficient and adequate notice of her intention to relocate.

Full case is available on CanLii: https://canlii.ca/t/jk7xd

CanLII calls upon users accessing its services a large number of times to ensure that they are people and not programs acting on command. Indeed, massive downloads are prohibited by CanLII’s Terms of Use. Though your own use may be quite limited, it may have been compiled with that of others in yo...

11/24/2021

An important decision out of the of Queen’s Bench of Alberta, Hatt v Heather, 2021 ABQB 878, wherein the sought a retroactive to on-going section 3 and section 7 payments due to his reduced income.
Lema J considered relevant concluding that a variation of income of less than 10% does not constitute a sufficient material change to warrant a variation to child support (para 22). The Court also emphasized that, in child support cases, the parties must provide each other with disclosure of income and section 7 expenses at least once per annum.

For those interested, check out the full case on CanLii: https://canlii.ca/t/jk6jb

If you or someone you know requires legal support, call us today - 587-315-6490

CanLII calls upon users accessing its services a large number of times to ensure that they are people and not programs acting on command. Indeed, massive downloads are prohibited by CanLII’s Terms of Use. Though your own use may be quite limited, it may have been compiled with that of others in yo...

11/17/2021

Short and sweet, but still a good one for your bank – Blacklock v Tkacz, 2021 ONCA 630.

The sought retroactive against the father’s estate. Though a was granted, directing the father to pay section 3 child support of $20 per week for the parties 2 , the Judgment did not specify that those payments would be on the father’s .

The Court dismissed the mothers , relying upon Katz v Katz, 2014 ONCA 606, and section 17 of the Divorce Act, explaining that “…an application cannot be brought to vary a claim or vary a support order against a deceased’s estate if the original order is silent on whether that order binds the estate” (para 4).

The morale of the decision is that all should say that any support arrears are binding on the payors estate.

Ronald S. Foster, Q.C.
Senior Counsel

Family Law Solutions
Foster Dickson O’Brien
1400, 350 7th Avenue SW
Calgary Alberta T2P 3N9
T 587 315 6491

11/04/2021

November is Alberta Month!

Did you know that are required to screen for ?

Though not explicitly provided, the obligation to screen for family violence has been raised in the context of the amended Divorce Act, RSC 1985 c 3 (2nd Supp), (the “Divorce Act”) and, specifically, s 7.3, which suggests that where appropriate and available parties should attempt to resolve matters through an alternate family dispute resolution process. Furthermore, s 16 of the Divorce Act requires the to consider family violence as a factor when determining the of the .

In Colucci v Colucci, 2021 SCC 24, (“Colucci”), section 7.3 of the Divorce Act and resolution of issues outside of the courts was further discussed. The Supreme Court of Canada stated:

“[69]…Parents should be encouraged – absent family violence or significant power imbalances – to resolve their disputes themselves outside the court structure and legal rules should be clear and accessible so they may reach fair agreements.”

The Supreme Court infer in Colucci that it would be inappropriate to refer or encourage to pursue alternate dispute resolutions when family violence or potential power imbalances may exist.

Ultimately, lawyers have a fiduciary duty to ensure that clients feel safe and are able to negotiate a fair settlement.

for family violence should be done at the commencement of a file and template screening tools are attached for your use.

If you or someone you know is experiencing family violence or abuse, please visit the Government of website for information and resources - http://ow.ly/JJii50GGeIj

Learn where to turn when faced with family violence or domestic violence, and know your rights and the law.