Trusted Tips and Resources

Trusted Tips & Resources

Trusted Regina Lawyers at MacKay & McLean Share the Law Around Domestic Violence and Best Interests of the Child.

MacKay & McLean provides the professional services of a large Regina law firm, with the intimate attention of a small firm. The legal process can be daunting and overwhelming, but it doesn't have to be. MacKay & McLean is with you every step of the way.

MacKay &  McLean is a  TRUSTED REGINA LAW Firm. In Mackay & Mclean's latest legal tip they provide helpful information about the family law about domestic violence and the duty of care to children.  

Family Lawyers at MacKay & McLean Barristers & Solicitors Share the Law Around Domestic Violence and the Best Interests of the Child. 



In our latest Trusted Regina Legal tip, we share information on domestic violence and the Children’s Law Act when considering the best interests of the child.


On March 1, 2021, The Children’s Law Act, 2020 (the “CLA”) came into force. The CLA amended the criteria for the best interests of the child analysis, directing the courts to more effectively consider family violence as a factor when determining decision-making responsibilities and parenting time.

The relevant sections of the CLA for determining an appropriate parenting order are sections 10(1) through 10(4), which now specifically require the court to take into consideration any family violence including the nature, seriousness and frequency of violence, the harm or risk of harm to the child and the pattern of this behaviour, amongst other factors. 

Allegations of domestic violence are present in a significant number of applications before the court. However, more often than not, the alleged abuser categorically denies the allegations. The issue of who to believe and what weight to attribute to the allegations has been a common issue in family law. With the new amendments to the CLA, these issues are, once again, front and center.

Since the CLA came into force several cases have come before the Saskatchewan Court of Queen’s Bench addressing this issue. In Juraville v Armstrong, 2021 SKQB 73, the mother and father both alleged physical, verbal, emotional and sexual abuse at the hands of the other and denied, absolutely and completely, the version told by the other. Mr. Justice Megaw performed an in-depth analysis of how the court considers contradictory evidence of domestic violence in light of decision making and parenting, stating:

 

The real question, therefore, is not whether particular events, or any events, did or did not happen. Those may be determined in a trial, or they may remain undetermined. The focus of the court now must be on, and remain on, the best interests of these children and how to safely structure parenting in view of what is being alleged. The allegations of violence and abuse must, of course, be considered in determining these best interests. Such consideration is done not from a perspective of punishing the alleged abuser, or any party. It is important to keep in mind, by addressing the allegations of violence and abuse and by inserting protections, the court is not to be seen as having made findings of fact regarding these allegations.
 

Ultimately, despite the significant allegations of domestic violence, Mr. Justice Megaw determined that the concerns regarding allegations of violence could be addressed by ensuring the parties did not interact on a personal level and that the evidence did not support a conclusion that the children’s best interests would prevent parenting time with either the mother or father.

In a similar decision, DW v EO, 2021 SKQB 157, both parents alleged domestic violence was inflicted by the other and adamantly denied they were the perpetrator of any abuse. Despite the allegations, Madam Justice Richmond determined that it was still in the child’s best interests to have a shared parenting arrangement to facilitate the relationship between the child and both parents. This, despite the fact that both parents alleged family violence, demonstrated an unwillingness to cooperate with the other regarding the care of the child with violence and arguments continuing to occur in front of the child and a high level of anger and animosity towards each other.

While it is now a legislative requirement through the CLA for the court to consider domestic violence when analyzing the best interests of the child, it is still only one of many factors for the court to consider in a highly subjective analysis. Based on recent case law, the presence of domestic violence, particularly where the violence has not been inflicted on the child, appears to have minimal impact on the best interests of the child analysis.


Robert Mackay and the team at Mackay & McLean offer a variety of legal services and are able to represent you in a variety of situations that require counsel. In addition, they offer a free initial consultation. Trusted Regina Lawyers, based in Regina Saskatchewan, specialized in real estatecriminalpersonal injurycommercial & family law.

See more legal tips from Mackay & McLean here 




Trusted Regina Lawyers At MacKay & McLean Explain Custody and COVID-19 Vaccinations

MacKay & McLean provides the professional services of a large Regina law firm, with the intimate attention of a small firm. The legal process can be daunting and overwhelming, but it doesn't have to be. MacKay & McLean is with you every step of the way.

MacKay &  McLean are TRUSTED REGINA LAWYERS. In Mackay & McLeans latest legal tip they provide helpful information for separated couples about chid custody and COVID-19 Vaccinations. 

Things To Consider Regarding Custody and Covid Vaccinations- A Legal Perspective 


 Most parents who are separated or divorced will have joint decision-making authority (previously known as joint custody), through a separation agreement or court order. This means that both parents’ consent is required for medical decisions, which includes vaccinations. For most parents, the decision to vaccinate their children is an easy decision to make. However, with the introduction of the experimental COVID-19 vaccine, whether or not to vaccinate is a rapidly increasing issue in family disputes. This issue is further complicated when the child reaches an age where they can express their opinion on the issue.

Canadian courts, in considering the views of a minor when determining what is in their best interests, contemplate what is referred to as the “mature minor doctrine.” In deciding whether or not to take a child’s voice into consideration, the court considers the child’s age and their maturity. Even if the court does decide to take the views of a child into consideration, the child’s wishes are not determinative. Rather, they are simply one factor to be taken into consideration against the entire backdrop of the situation.

The issue of competing wishes amongst a child and their parent(s) on obtaining the COVID-19 vaccination was recently addressed by Mr. Justice Megaw of the Saskatchewan Court of Queen’s Bench in the decision O.M.S v E.J.S., 2021 SKQB 243. The father of a 12-year-old daughter sought an order allowing him to get his daughter vaccinated without the consent of the mother, who was opposed.

The father wanted his daughter to receive the vaccination due to his concerns regarding the COVID-19 virus, while the mother was opposed based on the daughter’s desire not to have the vaccination, the daughter’s diagnosis of vaccine toxicity, and the mother’s general opposition to vaccinations and concerns about the accuracy of COVID-19 information.
In making his decision, Mr. Justice Megaw undertook an analysis of the Divorce Act and relevant case precedents with his primary focus being on the best interests of the child. In considering the child’s wishes, Mr. Justice Megaw stated:
I cannot simply, in any event, exercising the Court’s parens patriae jurisdiction, leave the decision in this regard in the hands of a 12-year-old. She is, after all, a child. She is 12. She is entitled to expect the ongoing guidance of the adults in her life and she is not entitled on all matters to simply make a decision on her own. This is one of those situations. Her views, as suspect as they may be, do not carry the day here.
Mr. Justice Megaw, taking into consideration the global pandemic, the child’s needs, and the child’s views and preferences, determined that it was in the best interests of the child to receive the vaccination without the consent of the mother, despite the contrary desire of the child.

In a similar decision, D.P. v G.M., 2021 QCCS 3582, the Superior Court of Quebec decided in favor of a 12-year-old child receiving the COVID-19 vaccination who, unlike in O.M.S v E.J.S., 2021 SKQB 243, expressed a desire to receive the vaccination. The child’s mother asked the court to grant an order allowing her son to receive the vaccine, while the father refused as he believed the child already had antibodies and was concerned about side effects due to the child’s weight and previous allergies. The child was represented by his own lawyer and representations were made on his behalf confirming his desire to receive the vaccination.
The court, focusing on the best interests of the child, determined that it was in the child’s best interests for the vaccination to be administered without the consent of the father. When considering the child’s wishes, the court stated:
Although the child’s desire cannot be considered as decisive in the present matter (only a minor aged 14 years and may give his consent to care alone), the Court notes that the child’s wish is serious and well-reasoned.
In a decision of the Ontario Superior Court, A.C. v. L.L., 2021 ONSC 6530, the parents of 14 year old triplets agreed that their children had the capacity to make a decision on whether or not they received the COVID-19 vaccination. The court, in light of the parents’ agreement, allowed for two of the children to receive the vaccination, and one not to, based on their respective wishes.

While there have been a limited number of reported decisions addressing children and the experimental COVID-19 vaccination in the context of a separation or divorce, the courts appear to be ruling in favor of a child getting vaccinated in accordance with public health guidelines, regardless of the wishes of the child or a vaccine-hesitant parent.
If you are separated or divorced and dealing with the issue of vaccinating your children, our lawyers are ready to help. Contact our office for a free 30 minute consultation.




Robert Mackay and the team at Mackay & McLean offer a variety of legal services and are able to represent you in a variety of situations that require counsel. In addition, they offer a free initial consultation. They are Trusted Regina Lawyers, based in Regina Saskatchewan,  and they specialize in real estatecriminalpersonal injurycommercial & family law.

See more legal tips from Mackay & McLean here 



Trusted Regina Lawyer gives us some advice about why you should consider fighting Traffic Tickets

MacKay & McLean provides the professional services of a large Regina law firm, with the intimate attention of a small firm. The legal process can be daunting and overwhelming, but it doesn't have to be. MacKay & McLean is with you every step of the way.

MacKay &  McLean are your Trusted REGINA LAWYERS. In Mackay & Mcleans' latest legal tip they provide helpful information about traffic tickets! 

Should you fight your traffic ticket?


Here are some important points to consider when deciding if you should fight your traffic ticket.


  1. Did you ever feel that when you received a traffic ticket you were already considered guilty?
  2. If you were told you were cheating on an exam, would you simply accept it? 
  3. If your bank told you that you’re being charged a fee because you overspent, when you didn’t – would you just “pay it?
  4. Would you just accept being overcharged at the grocery store and not say anything?


"The average person’s experience with the police is nearly always with a traffic stop. Most of us are nervous with this singular encounter. The expectation is that you have been caught doing something against the law and the expectation is that you will just take the punishment of paying the fine." Robert Mackay 
Make no mistake Traffic Tickets is an industry and the only significant revenue source, besides taxes, for the court system. Most cities and towns with a police force place the amount expected from traffic tickets as part of their yearly budget. Conflict of interest bleeds through the entire system. 


Here are some of the many reasons why you should consider fighting your ticket:

  • Civic duty - government considers it a good source of extra revenue. Fighting them discourages over-use 
  • Just paying the ticket costs money
  • It will cost you more money when you renew your license
  • Tickets affect your driving record
  • Too many tickets can affect whether you can drive, or not
  • It can affect your insurance premiums
  • Points against your licence can add up quickly but take a long time to disappear
  • Maybe you just want time to pay your ticket - fighting it often gives you more time
  • You might not actually be guilty of anything

How to Decide Whether to Fight or Fold


Before assuming the ticket can’t be beaten and resigning yourself to writing out that check, we encourage you to take a hard look at the facts to see if you have a reasonable chance of success. You may be surprised at the variety of legal grounds available for defeating your ticket. 


Here are some questions to determine whether going to court makes sense


  • Was the officer’s view of what occurred ­obstructed by other moving vehicles or ­stationary objects like trees, fences, or ­buildings? If so, this allows you to argue that the ­officer could not have clearly seen the ­alleged offence and gives you an opening to sell your ­version of events to the judge.
  • Did the officer stop the right car? It is quite possible in heavy traffic for an officer to see a violation committed by one white minivan (a 1995 Plymouth Voyager, for example) and to stop ­another (an almost identical white 1994 Dodge Caravan) farther down the road. Your ability to claim this happened (“the officer got the wrong driver, Your Honor”) obviously goes way up if you can show that because of a curve in the road, construction project, or just heavy traffic, the ­officer lost sight of the offending vehicle ­between the violation and pulling you over.
  • Was there an actual, provable error in the officer’s approach or methodology? Inciting you for speeding, did the ­officer correctly pace your vehicle or properly use radar, or laser to establish your speed?
  • Do any other legal defences exist to the law you’re charged with ­violating? For ­example, if you were charged with driving too slowly in the left lane of a multi-lane highway, it is a legal defence that you were planning to turn left.



Robert Mackay and the team at Mackay & McLean offer a variety of legal services and are able to represent you in a variety of situations that require counsel. In addition, they offer a free initial consultation. They have Trusted Regina Lawyers, based in Regina Saskatchewan,  and they specialize in real estatecriminalpersonal injurycommercial & family law.

See more legal tips from Mackay & McLean here 


Here is a list of more consumer tips by Robert MacKay 

Trusted Regina Real Estate Lawyer Robert MacKay Shares That The Bank Of Canada has lowered the mortgage stress tests rate

MacKay & McLean provides the professional services of a large Regina law firm, with the intimate attention of a small firm. The legal process can be daunting and overwhelming, but it doesn't have to be. MacKay & McLean is with you every step of the way.

MacKay &  McLean are TRUSTED REGINA LAWYERS

When looking to buy, sell, or refinance a property, you need to hire somebody who is not a stranger to addressing the real estate needs of individuals and families. 

Bank of Canada lowers qualifying rate used in mortgage stress tests

The Canadian Press - Jul 19, 2019

With files from BNN Bloomberg


According the Canadian Press  and other sources The Bank of Canada has lowered the rate used by mortgage stress tests to determine whether would-be homeowners can qualify, marking the first drop in three years.

The central bank's five-year benchmark qualifying rate is now 5.19 per cent, down from 5.34 per cent.

It's the first decrease in the five-year fixed mortgage rate since September 2016, when it dropped from 4.74 per cent to 4.64 per cent, and increased steadily since.

Rob McLister, founder of mortgage comparison website RateSpy.com, says the dip will increase the buying power for mortgage borrowers by allowing them to afford up to 1.4 per cent more home.

For example, someone putting a 20-per-cent down payment on a home who makes $50,000 per year can now afford $4,000 more home, according to calculations by Ratespy.com.




The Bank of Canada's five-year benchmark rate is calculated using the posted rates at the Big Six Banks.

Home sales softened last year after the federal government introduced new stress test rules for uninsured mortgages, or those with a down payment of more than 20 per cent, and mortgage rates inched higher.

As of Jan. 1, 2018, to qualify for an uninsured mortgage, borrowers needed to prove they could still make payments at a qualifying rate of the greater of two percentage points higher than the contractual mortgage rate or the central bank's five-year benchmark rate.

An existing stress test already stipulated that homebuyers with less than a 20-per-cent down payment seeking an insured mortgage must qualify at the central bank's benchmark five-year mortgage rate.

The federal financial regulator has said that the new, stricter regulations aimed to tighten mortgage lending and take some of the risk out of the market.

Meanwhile, home sales have improved in recent months as mortgage rates have moved lower.

But on Thursday, the Ontario Real Estate Association called for less stringent mortgage rules, saying that policy changes are needed to counter a downward trend in home ownership.

OREA's chief executive Tim Hudak said in a letter to federal policy-makers that Ottawa should consider restoring 30-year insured mortgages, ease up on the interest rate stress test and eliminate the test altogether for those renewing their mortgage with a different lender.

Borrowers looking to renew their mortgages are subject to stress tests if they switch to a new lender, but not if they stick with their current one.

In a May letter to policy-makers, the chief executive of Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation defended the stricter lending rules, arguing that "the stress test is doing what it is supposed to do."


For more questions and help with any legal property issues consult with our Trusted Regina Real Estate Lawyer Robert MacKay


Here is a list of more consumer tips by Robert MacKay 



Robert MacKay's team provides professional, personalized service and with their assistance, you can rest assured that your real estate transactions will be handled with the utmost consideration and care.

They  provide a full range of legal services including:

  • Real Estate & Mortgages
  • Wills & Estates
  • Family Law & Divorce
  • Commercial & Corporate Law
  • Litigation & Personal Injury

ROBERT Mackay is your TRUSTED REGINA REAL ESTATE LAWYER!



Previous Posts

ADDRESS

S & E Trusted Online Directories Inc
TrustedRegina.com
310 Wall St #209
Saskatoon, SK   S7K 1N7
Ph: 306.244.4150

GET THE APP

App Store Google Play
Follow us on Facebook Instagram Linked In Twitter YouTube RSS Feed
Abex
Abex
Stevies
Sabex
NEYA
Website hosting by Insight Hosting