Talk:Changing Family Law Orders and Agreements Involving Children: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Justin Werb (talk | contribs) |
Nate Russell (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
==New cases on relocation== | ==New cases on relocation== | ||
Editors of this page (Justin, Ron and Mary) may want to see if the new Supreme Court case [http://canlii.ca/t/fztt9 L.J.R. v. S.W.R.] means that any changes to the section on "Relocating with or without a child" should be considered.--[[User:Nate Russell|Nate Russell]] ([[User talk:Nate Russell|talk]]) 15:49, 9 August 2013 (PDT) | Editors of this page (Justin, Ron and Mary) may want to see if the new Supreme Court case [http://canlii.ca/t/fztt9 L.J.R. v. S.W.R.] means that any changes to the section on "Relocating with or without a child" should be considered.--[[User:Nate Russell|Nate Russell]] ([[User talk:Nate Russell|talk]]) 15:49, 9 August 2013 (PDT) | ||
:Hi Nate - thanks for the message. Definitely will review the case - we are due to have a team meeting later this month and will discuss this case and a few other cases at that time. Edits should be forthcoming shortly!--[[User:Justin Werb|Justin Werb]] ([[User talk:Justin Werb|talk]]) 17:37, 9 August 2013 (PDT) | |||
::Glad to hear you are all meeting to discuss this. Justin, I have taken the liberty to move your reply comment to underneath my original one, since that is the easiest way to know which comments are connected.--[[User:Nate Russell|Nate Russell]] ([[User talk:Nate Russell|talk]]) 11:11, 12 August 2013 (PDT) |
Revision as of 18:11, 12 August 2013
New cases on relocation[edit]
Editors of this page (Justin, Ron and Mary) may want to see if the new Supreme Court case L.J.R. v. S.W.R. means that any changes to the section on "Relocating with or without a child" should be considered.--Nate Russell (talk) 15:49, 9 August 2013 (PDT)
- Hi Nate - thanks for the message. Definitely will review the case - we are due to have a team meeting later this month and will discuss this case and a few other cases at that time. Edits should be forthcoming shortly!--Justin Werb (talk) 17:37, 9 August 2013 (PDT)
- Glad to hear you are all meeting to discuss this. Justin, I have taken the liberty to move your reply comment to underneath my original one, since that is the easiest way to know which comments are connected.--Nate Russell (talk) 11:11, 12 August 2013 (PDT)