If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Oh, those nutty Canadian Kourts...
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servl...tep1208/BNStor
y/National/ Saskatchewan father loses child-support case Thursday, December 8, 2005 Posted at 8:55 PM EST Canadian Press Regina - A Saskatchewan man must continue paying child support for his stepdaughter even though his ex-wife married the child's biological father, a court has ruled. The Saskatchewan Court of Appeal judgment handed down in November struck down a lower court ruling that said the man was no longer obliged to pay. The appeal court ordered the man to pay half of what he was originally paying in monthly child support plus $12,144 in arrears. He must also maintain his parental relationship with the girl. The couple, whose name is not being published to protect their privacy, married in May 1998 after living together for about 3½ years. They separated two months later. The woman, who had a daughter in June 1995 from a previous relationship, gave birth to his child on Oct. 13, 1996. The man petitioned for divorce in November 1998 and claimed access to the children. When his ex-wife and the girl's biological father reconciled and married in September 2000, he sought permission from the courts to discontinue making support payments for his stepdaughter and to sever his relationship with her. In a November 2004 decision Queen's Bench Justice Robert Laing ruled in favour of the man. The girls' mother then appealed that ruling. -- -------------------------------------------------------------------- Liberalism: that haunting fear that someone, somewhere, can help themselves without Government intervention. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Oh, those nutty Canadian Kourts...
"Dusty" wrote in message ... http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servl...tep1208/BNStor y/National/ Saskatchewan father loses child-support case Thursday, December 8, 2005 Posted at 8:55 PM EST Canadian Press Regina - A Saskatchewan man must continue paying child support for his stepdaughter even though his ex-wife married the child's biological father, a court has ruled. The Saskatchewan Court of Appeal judgment handed down in November struck down a lower court ruling that said the man was no longer obliged to pay. The appeal court ordered the man to pay half of what he was originally paying in monthly child support plus $12,144 in arrears. He must also maintain his parental relationship with the girl. The couple, whose name is not being published to protect their privacy, married in May 1998 after living together for about 3½ years. They separated two months later. The woman, who had a daughter in June 1995 from a previous relationship, gave birth to his child on Oct. 13, 1996. The man petitioned for divorce in November 1998 and claimed access to the children. When his ex-wife and the girl's biological father reconciled and married in September 2000, he sought permission from the courts to discontinue making support payments for his stepdaughter and to sever his relationship with her. In a November 2004 decision Queen's Bench Justice Robert Laing ruled in favour of the man. The girls' mother then appealed that ruling. I can hardly express in words the UTTER INSANITY of the appeal court AND the girls' mother - but then again I made the MISTAKE of looking at this from an ethical viewpoint! Phil -- -------------------------------------------------------------------- Liberalism: that haunting fear that someone, somewhere, can help themselves without Government intervention. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Oh, those nutty Canadian Kourts...
"Philip Lewis" wrote in The girls' mother then appealed that ruling. I can hardly express in words the UTTER INSANITY of the appeal court AND the girls' mother - but then again I made the MISTAKE of looking at this from an ethical viewpoint! Yes, all too often the concept of logic and common sense can escape the best of judges when lawyers play & twist the truth to manipulate I wonder what possible argument could justify and force a man to pay for another man's child? Is it not possible the judge is incompetent and should be cleared from the bench by his peers? |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Oh, those nutty Canadian Kourts...
The girls' mother then appealed that ruling.
I can hardly express in words the UTTER INSANITY of the appeal court AND the girls' mother - but then again I made the MISTAKE of looking at this from an ethical viewpoint! Yes, all too often the concept of logic and common sense can escape the best of judges when lawyers play & twist the truth to manipulate I wonder what possible argument could justify and force a man to pay for another man's child? Is it not possible the judge is incompetent and should be cleared from the bench by his peers? The judge IS incompetent, no doubt about it, he should be cleared from the bench in any legal way possible. They do stupid things in the U.S., it seems Canada is able to top it. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Oh, those nutty Canadian Kourts...
Joe St. Lucas wrote: The girls' mother then appealed that ruling. I can hardly express in words the UTTER INSANITY of the appeal court AND the girls' mother - but then again I made the MISTAKE of looking at this from an ethical viewpoint! Yes, all too often the concept of logic and common sense can escape the best of judges when lawyers play & twist the truth to manipulate I wonder what possible argument could justify and force a man to pay for another man's child? Is it not possible the judge is incompetent and should be cleared from the bench by his peers? The judge IS incompetent, no doubt about it, he should be cleared from the bench in any legal way possible. They do stupid things in the U.S., it seems Canada is able to top it. Did the man in question adopt the child? Did the biodad relinquish his rights as a parent? If this is the case, the judge was just following the law. It's stupid, yes, but there you go. Something one of our recent posters here should think about. - Ron ^*^ |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Oh, those nutty Canadian Kourts...
jstlucas at hotmail dot com @delete.thisstuff (Joe St. Lucas) wrote in message news:FREmf.660$Ru.295@fed1read05... The girls' mother then appealed that ruling. I can hardly express in words the UTTER INSANITY of the appeal court AND the girls' mother - but then again I made the MISTAKE of looking at this from an ethical viewpoint! Yes, all too often the concept of logic and common sense can escape the best of judges when lawyers play & twist the truth to manipulate I wonder what possible argument could justify and force a man to pay for another man's child? Is it not possible the judge is incompetent and should be cleared from the bench by his peers? The judge IS incompetent, no doubt about it, he should be cleared from the bench in any legal way possible. They do stupid things in the U.S., it seems Canada is able to top it. Oh, I dunno. My brother in law married a woman, not knowing she was already pregnant. He raised the child until she was 4. Then the mom left him, taking the child with her. She got CS, of course, and cut off any visitation because he was "violent." Didn't have to prove it--just say it. She was also awarded alimony until she married again. She told the girl that her "dad" didn't love her (the child)--that's why he threw them out. Sweet mama then moved in with the child's bio dad--keeping both alimony and CS. Everyone knew it--the courts knew it--but he still had to pay. She would taunt him about it, and tell him that "his" daughter hated him--and nobody would do anything to fix the situation. Sick, huh? |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Oh, those nutty Canadian Kourts...
"DB" wrote in message news "Philip Lewis" wrote in The girls' mother then appealed that ruling. I can hardly express in words the UTTER INSANITY of the appeal court AND the girls' mother - but then again I made the MISTAKE of looking at this from an ethical viewpoint! Yes, all too often the concept of logic and common sense can escape the best of judges when lawyers play & twist the truth to manipulate I wonder what possible argument could justify and force a man to pay for another man's child? Is it not possible the judge is incompetent and should be cleared from the bench by his peers? You could be right but I suspect something much more serious and sinister. For example WHOM made the mother feel confident enough to intiate the challenge via the appeal court in the first place - somehow I doubt she would have initiated this action were it not for 'knowing' advice that she had a good chance of success - personally I suspect that feminist activism within the legal system is increasingly corrupting law and the very principles of justice. Phil |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Oh, those nutty Canadian Kourts...
Hi hope he counter-appeals to the Surpeme Court of Canada! This is a
mockery of justice. Let the biological father support the child - after all, he IS domiciled with the child and the mother now! On Sat, 10 Dec 2005 01:46:47 -0500, "Dusty" wrote: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servl...tep1208/BNStor y/National/ Saskatchewan father loses child-support case Thursday, December 8, 2005 Posted at 8:55 PM EST Canadian Press Regina - A Saskatchewan man must continue paying child support for his stepdaughter even though his ex-wife married the child's biological father, a court has ruled. The Saskatchewan Court of Appeal judgment handed down in November struck down a lower court ruling that said the man was no longer obliged to pay. The appeal court ordered the man to pay half of what he was originally paying in monthly child support plus $12,144 in arrears. He must also maintain his parental relationship with the girl. The couple, whose name is not being published to protect their privacy, married in May 1998 after living together for about 3½ years. They separated two months later. The woman, who had a daughter in June 1995 from a previous relationship, gave birth to his child on Oct. 13, 1996. The man petitioned for divorce in November 1998 and claimed access to the children. When his ex-wife and the girl's biological father reconciled and married in September 2000, he sought permission from the courts to discontinue making support payments for his stepdaughter and to sever his relationship with her. In a November 2004 decision Queen's Bench Justice Robert Laing ruled in favour of the man. The girls' mother then appealed that ruling. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Oh, those nutty Canadian Kourts...
I have a feeling that the law was followed to the letter on this one. That being said, it's a stupid outcome, and like most cases of stupid outcomes being the result of following the law to the letter, this isn't going to get fixed until it personally affects someone in a position of political power. And even then, it'll be a "wink and sweep it under the carpet job" if at all possible, so as not to actually have to CHANGE anything. - Ron ^*^ NewMan wrote: Hi hope he counter-appeals to the Surpeme Court of Canada! This is a mockery of justice. Let the biological father support the child - after all, he IS domiciled with the child and the mother now! On Sat, 10 Dec 2005 01:46:47 -0500, "Dusty" wrote: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servl...tep1208/BNStor y/National/ Saskatchewan father loses child-support case Thursday, December 8, 2005 Posted at 8:55 PM EST Canadian Press Regina - A Saskatchewan man must continue paying child support for his stepdaughter even though his ex-wife married the child's biological father, a court has ruled. The Saskatchewan Court of Appeal judgment handed down in November struck down a lower court ruling that said the man was no longer obliged to pay. The appeal court ordered the man to pay half of what he was originally paying in monthly child support plus $12,144 in arrears. He must also maintain his parental relationship with the girl. The couple, whose name is not being published to protect their privacy, married in May 1998 after living together for about 3½ years. They separated two months later. The woman, who had a daughter in June 1995 from a previous relationship, gave birth to his child on Oct. 13, 1996. The man petitioned for divorce in November 1998 and claimed access to the children. When his ex-wife and the girl's biological father reconciled and married in September 2000, he sought permission from the courts to discontinue making support payments for his stepdaughter and to sever his relationship with her. In a November 2004 decision Queen's Bench Justice Robert Laing ruled in favour of the man. The girls' mother then appealed that ruling. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Oh, those nutty Canadian Kourts...
"DB" wrote in message news (snip) DB wrote: I wonder what possible argument could justify and force a man to pay for another man's child? If a man acts in a fatherly capacity and is living with a child not his own for any length of time, he can indeed be held up for child support. A BC court ruled similar in a situation involving an acquaintance of mine. The divorced bio-father was making child-support payments while this acquaintance was married to this woman. And after these two divorced, he was also ordered to pay. The mother ended up collecting from two men for that one child. If a woman plays her cards right, and has successive marriages, there may indeed be instances where she can collect from any and all men who acted as a father along with that bio-father. Biology does not necessarily determine father responsibility. The *relationship with the child* is also considered. Heidi |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Babies and 'gutless' Royal Canadian Mounted Police | Todd Gastaldo | Pregnancy | 9 | November 20th 05 10:22 PM |
A 'shocking announcement' - Canadian chiros whining - babies be damned... | Todd Gastaldo | Pregnancy | 0 | April 5th 05 09:03 PM |
'COCOA'S' LIE; "THERE IS *NO* MERCURY IN CANADIAN VACCINES" | Ilena Rose | Kids Health | 16 | April 4th 05 10:48 PM |
Canadian Court Rethinks Spanking | Hammer | Spanking | 0 | January 25th 04 07:54 PM |
Babies likely don't care that Canada NewsWire is not 'Canadian press' | Todd Gastaldo | Pregnancy | 0 | July 16th 03 01:38 AM |