9:15 - 11:50 B Block Legal Studies
12:30 - 3:05 C Block Social and Environmental Sciences
B Block Legal Studies - After today there are 3 classes remaining in the learning commons to complete your civil litigator project. First, we'll start in the class, looking at family law. We'll talk about annulments, divorce, property division and support obligations. We'll look at: the equal division rule and the matrimonial home; spousal support and self sufficiency; and the types of child guardianship, access, and child support. After, I will bring previous examples of the project with me to the learning commons for you to peruse if you'd like. Don't forget, if you need to film in front of a green screen you need to make arrangements with Mr. Ingram in room 003...preferably today. For more on Spousal Support Advisory Guidelines and entitlement check out the website here. When it comes to spousal support, the existing legal framework recognizes three bases for entitlement: compensatory, non-compensatory, or contractual.
Also important is the concept of self-sufficiency
s. 15.2(6)(d) of the Divorce Act, “in so far as practicable, promote the economic self-sufficiency of each spouse within a reasonable period of time.” Once the recipient has become “self-sufficient”, then spousal support can be terminated
For Child Support in Canada check out About Child Support in Canada or see the schedule of tables used to calculate support in British Columbia here.
From the Department of Justice:
The guiding principle of Canada’s child support law is that children should continue to benefit from the financial means of both parents just as they would if the parents were still together. Therefore, if you are divorced or separated from the other parent, you are both responsible for supporting your children financially. The Federal Child Support Guidelines (Federal Guidelines) are regulations made under the Divorce Act. They set out some rules and tables to show how much child support parents should pay when they divorce. The child support amounts in the tables reflect what parents living in the same province, with the same incomes and the same number of children would spend on their children.
A really good resource is the Families Change Guide to Separation & Divorce (BC)
- Compensatory claims are based either on the recipient’s economic loss or disadvantage as a result of the roles adopted during the marriage or on the recipient’s conferral of an economic benefit on the payor without adequate compensation.
- Non-compensatory claims involve claims based on need. “Need” can mean an inability to meet basic needs, but it has also generally been interpreted to cover a significant decline in standard of living from the marital standard. Non-compensatory support reflects the economic interdependency that develops as a result of a shared life, including significant elements of reliance and expectation, summed up in the phrase “merger over time”.
- Contractual claims covers not only formal domestic contracts but also implied or informal agreements.
Also important is the concept of self-sufficiency
s. 15.2(6)(d) of the Divorce Act, “in so far as practicable, promote the economic self-sufficiency of each spouse within a reasonable period of time.” Once the recipient has become “self-sufficient”, then spousal support can be terminated
For Child Support in Canada check out About Child Support in Canada or see the schedule of tables used to calculate support in British Columbia here.
From the Department of Justice:
The guiding principle of Canada’s child support law is that children should continue to benefit from the financial means of both parents just as they would if the parents were still together. Therefore, if you are divorced or separated from the other parent, you are both responsible for supporting your children financially. The Federal Child Support Guidelines (Federal Guidelines) are regulations made under the Divorce Act. They set out some rules and tables to show how much child support parents should pay when they divorce. The child support amounts in the tables reflect what parents living in the same province, with the same incomes and the same number of children would spend on their children.
A really good resource is the Families Change Guide to Separation & Divorce (BC)
Reibl v. Hughes (1980, SCC)
The Court held that the actions of the doctor in this case were negligent. The relationship of doctor -patient gives rise to a duty for the doctor to disclose all material risks relationship to the recommended surgery. The Court held that the doctor failed to adequately communicate to the appellant the risks of the operation that he was to undergo. The doctor was negligent in leaving the patient with the opinion that he would be better off for having the operation. The doctor should have more clearly explained the incidences of mortality and the incidences of morbidity. He was also negligent in not making it plain to the plaintiff appellant that the operation would not cure his headaches. There was no neurological deficit that mandated the surgery. There was also no emergency that required the surgery
1. Lack of informed consent won't lead to liability for battery unless there is no consent at all, where there is fraud, or where the treatment went beyond the consent. However, negligence principles are to be applied.
2. modified objective test - relies on a combination of objective and subjective factors in order to determine whether the failure to disclose actually caused the harm of which the plaintiff complains. It requires that the court consider what the reasonable patient in the circumstances of the plaintiff would have done if faced w/ the same situation.
1st QUESTION: Whether the Dr. gave the warning?
2nd QUESTION: Would the patient have gone ahead anyway?
To succeed there are 3 steps:
1. Plaintiff must show that material risk existed
2. Plaintiff must show that material risk was not disclosed
3. Plaintiff must show that had risk been disclosed plaintiff would not have consented - prove using the subjective/objective test
Family Compensation Act [RSBC 1996] Chapter 126
Medical Malpractice Canada
Lawyers BC Medical Malpractice
John McKiggan Medical Malpractice Informed Consent (minors)
FYI:
Spraggs & Co. Should I Claim My Work Injury with WorkSafeBC or in a Personal Injury Lawsuit?
Worksafe BC The basics of making a claim
Worksafe BC What you need to know about benefits and lawsuits for injury, death, or disease in the workplace
Worksafe BC Critical Incident Response
Worksafe BC Workers compensation and Lawsuit basics
Some help regarding the baseball case can be found at City of Vancouver Standards of Maintenance By Law (look at section 5 Structural Conditions). Some help regarding the amusement park and ski resort cases can be found at SAFETY STANDARDS ACT [SBC 2003] CHAPTER 39 and at Safety Standards Act
SAFETY STANDARDS GENERAL REGULATION.
Spraggs & Co. Should I Claim My Work Injury with WorkSafeBC or in a Personal Injury Lawsuit?
Worksafe BC The basics of making a claim
Worksafe BC What you need to know about benefits and lawsuits for injury, death, or disease in the workplace
Worksafe BC Critical Incident Response
Worksafe BC Workers compensation and Lawsuit basics
Some help regarding the baseball case can be found at City of Vancouver Standards of Maintenance By Law (look at section 5 Structural Conditions). Some help regarding the amusement park and ski resort cases can be found at SAFETY STANDARDS ACT [SBC 2003] CHAPTER 39 and at Safety Standards Act
SAFETY STANDARDS GENERAL REGULATION.
1. Which do you think is the best way to address this issue in your community, community action or public policy
2. What are the advantages of this solution? What are the disadvantages? You will need to be able to address the disadvantages, as well.
3. List some influential individuals or groups who might be willing to support your proposal.
4. How might you be able to win the support of some of these individuals or groups?
No comments:
Post a Comment