FamilyCounsel.ca
DivorceArbitrations.ca
Need a decision, but clients don't have the resources or time to wait for a trial?
Consider Family Law Arbitration
(website with advantages, FAQs,
and directory of arbitrators)

Proposals - Court Procedure

These proposals let family law lawyers discuss and vote on what changes they think should be made to the law or court procedures. The results can be viewed and shared with legislators and the Courts. The proposals put forth are written by member lawyers, and do not necessarily reflect the views of this website or its administrators. You can view more proposals or make a proposal yourself.


Proposal: Continue to backdate email filing
Court Procedure - Oct 8th

Anonymous6 Comments

A new announcement states that effective November 1st KB will no longer backdate filing, even when they reject or are slow to file.

It sounds like in several municipalities there isn't much faith that the Clerks will be able to file immediately by November 1st, or even the same day, and my understanding is that court runners are still being blocked.

If they're going to end backdating, they could at least wait until the Clerks have demonstrated the ability to keep up over a long enough period, or once court runners are permitted to file again, so that we can receive immediate feedback. Does anyone know how quickly they've been filing civil documents on the e-filing website?

If they're concerned with the number of rejections, perhaps they'd be better served by centralizing filing rules and imposing only necessary rules, rather than law by plethora of announcements and whim? How many well-being seminars and conferences do we need before the Court considers the undue stress that they're putting on lawyers and litigants?

100% in favour out of 29 votes


Proposal: QB Justices need training in family law
Court Procedure - Mar 30th

Anonymous13 Comments

There should be a separate section of QB where the Justices deal only with family law matters, similar to PC. Otherwise, all QB Justices should be given extensive family law training before they're allowed to handle family law cases.

100% in favour out of 32 votes


Proposal: Case Management works well
Court Procedure - Jan 26th

Ken Proudman of BARR LLP (Alberta)7 Comments

This time the QB Family Law Consulting Committee is seeking feedback regarding file management at the Court. They're looking for both criticism and praise of what does work well, and any suggestions about how to improve the process. I will pass along your feedback, or you're welcome to provide feedback directly to Teri Burant at tburant@emeryjamieson.com or 780-970-6291. Please provide feedback by February 2, 2022.

71% in favour out of 7 votes


Proposal: QB Pre-trial Conferences work well
Court Procedure - Jan 26th

Ken Proudman of BARR LLP (Alberta)0 Comments

This time the QB Family Law Consulting Committee is seeking feedback regarding file management at the Court. They're looking for both criticism and praise of what does work well, and any suggestions about how to improve the process. I will pass along your feedback, or you're welcome to provide feedback directly to Teri Burant at tburant@emeryjamieson.com or 780-970-6291. Please provide feedback by February 2, 2022.

80% in favour out of 5 votes


Proposal: Rule 4.10 Case Conferences work well
Court Procedure - Jan 26th

Ken Proudman of BARR LLP (Alberta)0 Comments

This time the QB Family Law Consulting Committee is seeking feedback regarding file management at the Court. They're looking for both criticism and praise of what does work well, and any suggestions about how to improve the process. I will pass along your feedback, or you're welcome to provide feedback directly to Teri Burant at tburant@emeryjamieson.com or 780-970-6291. Please provide feedback by February 2, 2022.

50% in favour out of 2 votes


Proposal: Special Chambers is working well
Court Procedure - Dec 22, 2021

Ken Proudman of BARR LLP (Alberta)4 Comments

This time the QB Family Law Consulting Committee is seeking feedback regarding chambers. They're looking for both criticism and praise of what does work well, and any suggestions about how to improve the process. I will pass along your feedback, or you're welcome to provide feedback directly to Teri Burant at tburant@emeryjamieson.com or 780-970-6291. Please provide feedback by January 18, 2022.

60% in favour out of 10 votes


Proposal: Regular Chambers is working well
Court Procedure - Dec 22, 2021

Ken Proudman of BARR LLP (Alberta)0 Comments

This time the QB Family Law Consulting Committee is seeking feedback regarding chambers. They're looking for both criticism and praise of what does work well, and any suggestions about how to improve the process. I will pass along your feedback, or you're welcome to provide feedback directly to Teri Burant at tburant@emeryjamieson.com or 780-970-6291. Please provide feedback by January 18, 2022.

67% in favour out of 9 votes


Proposal: Keep family docket's method of addressing disclosure in place as is
Court Procedure - Nov 8, 2021

Ken Proudman of BARR LLP (Alberta)5 Comments

The QB's Family Law Consulting Committee is seeking feedback relating to the family court disclosure process, so I thought I'd post this here so that I could pass along any feedback. Please provide any feedback before Nov 17, 2022. Alternatively, you can send your feedback directly to Teri Burant at tburant@emeryjamieson.com or 780-970-6291.

69% in favour out of 16 votes


Proposal: Keep the desk NTD process
Court Procedure - Nov 8, 2021

Ken Proudman of BARR LLP (Alberta)4 Comments

The QB's Family Law Consulting Committee is seeking feedback relating to the family court disclosure process, so I thought I'd post this here so that I could pass along any feedback. Please provide any feedback before Nov 17, 2022. Alternatively, you can send your feedback directly to Teri Burant at tburant@emeryjamieson.com or 780-970-6291.

46% in favour out of 13 votes


Proposal: Keep using videoconferencing for Regular Chambers
Court Procedure - Nov 8, 2021

Ken Proudman of BARR LLP (Alberta)5 Comments

I have mixed feelings about this one, I might even vote against my own proposal, but thought I'd put this proposal out there to see how others feel.

I miss discussing resolution at the courthouse steps when lawyers and clients were often all present and the reality of risks on each side set in, the rapport building coming from seeing our colleagues in person, being able to hand proposed forms of orders to judges, the lack of tech problem interruptions, and the effect of the Courthouse's formal setting upon clients.

But videoconferencing means that clients are no longer charged for travel, that small town and otherwise distant distant lawyers aren't disadvantaged, that we don't have to spend a lot of time choosing what documents to print and then organizing those documents, and that we can keep an eye on our emails at the same time. Given that our practice area focuses on individual services and not billion dollar corporations, affordability of legal services may be a paramount consideration.

81% in favour out of 21 votes













© 2016 to 2022 Kenneth J. Proudman. DISCLAIMER: The tools, documents, and other information herein are not legal, tax, or accounting advice or opinions. This website contains content and files submitted by third parties, to which you download or view at your own risk. By using this website, you agree to release Kenneth J. Proudman, BARR LLP, and Miller Boileau Family Law Group from all present and future claims and liability, including liability arising from any negligence.