Court Scheduling
I fully understand the multitude of factors involved in scheduling appearances before Masters and Judges in the Supreme Court. Cases settle, lawyers argue beyond their predicted times, people arrive with ex parte and short leave applications. But is there nothing that can be done to improve the system we have? Clerks are in a better position than virtually anyone else to make educated predictions as to the length of the cases they are dealing with and could inform the court registry on a regular basis. A system of priority could be issued which would at least provide clients with a marginal amount of information on which to base a decision as to whether or not to seek an adjournment. The current system of having lawyers seated, uninformed, around the court registry, waiting, does not seem to be particularly efficient.
Posted: August 5th, 2010 under Family Court, Procedure.
Tags: courts, delay, scheduling, waiting
Reassessment of Trial Decisions
The court in R.A.C. v. V.L.C., 2009 BCSC 1417 recently reviewed the law regarding when it can and should reconsider a trial decision. Under normal circumstances, a trial decision is geared towards ending the parties’ disputes and deciding the issues on a final basis. There are, however, occasions where the Judge’s trial decision requires reassessment based upon facts which were not available to the parties during the trial. This can only happen if a court order has not yet been entered. However, in that event, the court has an unfettered discretion to reconsider its decision but should do so exceedingly sparingly. Further, the court in R.A.C. acknowledged that the underlying rationale of the court’s discretion is prevent a miscarriage of justice from occurring.
A reassessment is a very rare occurrence and all efforts should be made to ensure that the issues and evidence are properly canvassed at trial.
Posted: December 1st, 2009 under Case Analysis, Family Court, Procedure.
Tags: orders, R.A.C. v. V.L.C., reassessment, trial
