Understanding the Legal System for Family Law Matters: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Understanding the Legal System for Family Law Matters (view source)
Revision as of 21:56, 4 April 2013
, 4 April 2013no edit summary
Brenda Rose (talk | contribs) mNo edit summary |
|||
| Line 11: | Line 11: | ||
==Introduction== | ==Introduction== | ||
When some couples separate, they just separate and it's over and done with. For other couples, separation raises a bunch of practical and legal problems. If a couple has children, they'll have to decide where the children will mostly live, how they will make parenting decisions, how much time each parent will have with the children, and how much child support should be paid. If one person is financially dependent on the other, they may have to decide whether spousal support should be paid. If the couple has property, they'll have to decide who should keep what. | When some couples separate, they just separate and it's over and done with. For other couples, separation raises a bunch of practical and legal problems. If a couple has children, they'll have to decide where the children <span class="noglossary">will</span> mostly live, how they <span class="noglossary">will</span> make parenting decisions, how much time each parent <span class="noglossary">will</span> have with the children, and how much child support should be paid. If one person is financially dependent on the other, they may have to decide whether spousal support should be paid. If the couple has property, they'll have to decide who should keep what. | ||
When a couple has problems like these, they also have to decide how they'll resolve them. In other words, they need to pick the legal process they'll use to figure everything out and get to a resolution. Some couples just talk it out. Others go to a trusted friend, family member, or community leader for help. Others use a mediator to help them find a solution. Others go to court. | When a couple has problems like these, they also have to decide how they'll resolve them. In other words, they need to pick the legal process they'll use to figure everything out and get to a resolution. Some couples just talk it out. Others go to a trusted friend, family member, or community leader for help. Others use a mediator to help them find a solution. Others go to court. | ||
| Line 116: | Line 116: | ||
===A handy chart=== | ===A handy chart=== | ||
This is a chart showing the structure of our courts. The lowest level of court in British Columbia are the provincial courts, the highest is the Court of Appeal for British Columbia; these courts are shown on the right. The highest court in the land, common to all provinces and territories is the Supreme Court of Canada, at the top. | This is a chart showing the structure of our courts. The lowest level of court in British Columbia are the provincial courts, the highest is the Court of Appeal for British Columbia; these courts are shown on the right. The highest court in the <span class="noglossary">land</span>, common to all provinces and territories is the Supreme Court of Canada, at the top. | ||
[[File:CourtChart.GIF|center|The court system in British Columbia]] | [[File:CourtChart.GIF|center|The court system in British Columbia]] | ||
| Line 153: | Line 153: | ||
In every case that goes to trial — and, to be clear, not every case does — the judge who hears the case must first make a decision about what the facts of the case are after he or she has listened to the evidence, since people hardly ever agree on the facts of the case. This is called a "finding of fact." The judge then reviews the law and the rules and legal principles that might apply, and decides what law applies to the legal issues. This is called making a "finding of law." The judge makes a decision about the legal claim by applying the law to the facts. | In every case that goes to trial — and, to be clear, not every case does — the judge who hears the case must first make a decision about what the facts of the case are after he or she has listened to the evidence, since people hardly ever agree on the facts of the case. This is called a "finding of fact." The judge then reviews the law and the rules and legal principles that might apply, and decides what law applies to the legal issues. This is called making a "finding of law." The judge makes a decision about the legal claim by applying the law to the facts. | ||
Sometimes the judge is able to make a decision after hearing all the evidence and | Sometimes the judge is able to make a decision after hearing all the evidence and parties' arguments. Most of the time, however, the judge will need to think about the evidence and the law before he or she can make a decision. This is called a "reserved judgment." | ||
===Appeal basics=== | ===Appeal basics=== | ||
| Line 165: | Line 165: | ||
An appeal court does not hear new evidence or make decisions about the facts of a case; the appeal court will accept the trial judge's findings of fact. If the appeal court is satisfied that the trial made a <span class="noglossary">mistake</span> about the law, however, the appeal may succeed. | An appeal court does not hear new evidence or make decisions about the facts of a case; the appeal court will accept the trial judge's findings of fact. If the appeal court is satisfied that the trial made a <span class="noglossary">mistake</span> about the law, however, the appeal may succeed. | ||
Appeals at the Supreme Court are heard by one judge; appeals at the Court of Appeal are heard by a panel of three or five judges. At the hearing, the person who started the appeal will go first and will explain why the trial judge made a <span class="noglossary">mistake</span> about the law. The other party goes next and explains why the trial judge appropriately considered the applicable legal principles and why the judge was right. Sometimes the court is able to make a decision after hearing from each party | Appeals at the Supreme Court are heard by one judge; appeals at the Court of Appeal are heard by a panel of three or five judges. At the hearing, the person who started the appeal will go first and will explain why the trial judge made a <span class="noglossary">mistake</span> about the law. The other party goes next and explains why the trial judge appropriately considered the applicable legal principles and why the judge was right. Sometimes the court is able to make a decision after hearing from each party. | ||
==Representing yourself== | ==Representing yourself== | ||