Lorne MacLean, BC Family Law Divorce Lawyer, was quoted in this weeks Macleans magazine once again showing he is at the cutting edge on the development and use of technology to help clients click here to read the article Lorne MacLean, MFLG Lawyer
“With this app, I thee divorce“
Archive for June, 2010
Macleans Magazine Article “With this app, I thee divorce“ quotes BC Divorce Lawyer, Lorne MacLean on Technology
Monday, June 28th, 2010BC CHILD CUSTODY PAS AND BORDERLINE PERSONALITY DISORDERS AND CUSTODY REPORTS
Friday, June 25th, 2010BC child custody courts have become more aware of Parental Alienation Syndrome in BC custody and access cases and psychological issues such as Borderline Personality Disorder
Lorne MacLean BC Child Custody Lawyer
Borderline Personality Disorder DSM IV Criteria
A pervasive pattern of instability of interpersonal relationships, self-image, and affects, and marked impulsivity beginning by early adulthood and present in a variety of contexts, as indicated by five (or more) of the following:
1. frantic efforts to avoid real or imagined abandonment. Note: Do not include suicidal or self-mutilating behavior covered in Criterion 5.
2. a pattern of unstable and intense interpersonal relationships characterized by alternating between extremes of idealization and devaluation.
3. identity disturbance: markedly and persistently unstable self-image or sense of self.
4. impulsivity in at least two areas that are potentially self-damaging (e.g., spending, sex, substance abuse, reckless driving, binge eating). Note: Do not include suicidal or self-mutilating behavior covered in Criterion 5.
5. recurrent suicidal behavior, gestures, or threats, or self-mutilating behavior
6. affective instability due to a marked reactivity of mood (e.g., intense episodic dysphoria, irritability, or anxiety usually lasting a few hours and only rarely more than a few days).
7. chronic feelings of emptiness
8. inappropriate, intense anger or difficulty controlling anger (e.g., frequent displays of temper, constant anger, recurrent physical fights)
9. transient, stress-related paranoid ideation or severe dissociative symptoms
If you suspect you are involved in a case involving alienation or borderline personality disorder or feel you are being unfairly accused of same contact Lorne MacLean immediately as time is of the essence in these cases.
BC High Net Worth Divorce Income and BC Family Assets Divorce Warning
Wednesday, June 23rd, 2010
Spencer MacLean Heads To Law School
The duty of full financial disclosure in a BC family law case can lead to mischief in the hands of disgruntled spouses
Did you know your BC divorce and BC family law finances disclosed in a BC divorce are not private?
Case in point, Michie v. Michie [2010] B.C.J. a BC family law appeal from the dismissal of an appellant husband’s interim family law application for an order to prevent his former wife from disclosing any information given by him to her in the BC divorce proceedings to determine his BC child support requirement to third party interests. The husband further requested a sealing of the file be established to the registry file with respect to the proceedings to prevent access to information by third parties on the basis it would jeopardize him financially.
Affidavits filed by the husband supporting his financial application that provided details about his current financial situation were copied by his former wife and sent to a previous business associate of the husband. The previous business associate and the husband were involved in an acrimonious dispute where the husband was publically alleged to have harassed the associate as well as his family.
The appeal contested that the chambers judge did not fairly nor fully take into account the husband’s privacy interests. The husband argued that the Rules of Court (B.C) provide a right of privacy most specifically Rule 60D(35), which required confidentiality for documents obtained in accordance with the Rule, as well as Rule 60D(3), which requires a party to provide applicable income documents arguing it was important to recognize that the definition also includes a statement of earnings. Primarily based upon the two rules stated above, the husband believed that these rules were general enough to include information related to the deponent’s financial circumstances contained within an affidavit so it would be kept private.
The appeal was dismissed on the grounds that there was no general right of privacy for financial information disclosed in a family proceeding. Although rule 60D(3) identifies specifically to the material which confidentiality applied it was determined to be an exception to the general open court policy of the law, and therefore did not include an affidavit that provided a comprehensive account of the deponent’s financial circumstances.
The court stated:
[23] Mr. Michie relies on Rule 60D(36) which allows the court to restrict publication of information if disclosure “would be a hardship”. He contends that dissemination of the information would prejudice his opportunity to obtain employment and this is an extra feature of his situation.
[24] The chambers judge specifically rejected this contention and was not satisfied it was “sufficient to establish hardship” under the Rule. In my view, he did not err in principle or commit a palpable and overriding error in so concluding.
This BC Appeal is significant because it provides us with insight into the importance of determining what is private as well as the consequences associated with a lack of privacy whether it be personal or financial. The privacy concerns are balanced against the right of the public to have open access to court files.
Moreover, this case raises serious concerns for parties involved in competitive business enterprises. Since the specific statutory wording in section 60D(35) does not prevent third parties from obtaining sensitive financial information concerning the parties, and in cases of high net worth individuals owning sensitive proprietary assets or being involved in a highly competitive industry the potential for mischief by a disgruntled spouse in revealing sensitive information cannot be underestimated.
It is critical that if you are involved in a case involving significant assets of a sensitive nature that you contact a lawyer who is fully knowledgeable about seeking orders of nondisclosure and the sealing of your file or the use initials on the file for privacy concerns related to finances, the parties, or most importantly their children.
Fort St John BC and Dawson Creek BC Personal Injury and ICBC Claims Free Initial Consultation
Tuesday, June 22nd, 2010
We can't protect you against a car accident but we will protect your ICBC Claim Rights
Personal injury and ICBC claim clients who have a Fort St John BC or Dawson Creek BC personal injury and ICBC claim can call us at 250-262-5052 to set up a free initial ICBC claim consultation with an experienced ICBC claim and personal injury lawyer.
CLICK HERE TO GO TO OUR ICBC CLAIMS AND PERSONAL INJURY CLAIMS FORT ST JOHN BC WEBSITE
Doug Conolly, an ICBC claim and personal injury lawyer who is a partner at McQuarrie Hunter in Vancouver BC is assisting us in meeting and helping Fort St John ICBC claim and Dawson Creek BC personal injury clients in the North Peace at our Fort St John personal injury law office located at 9503-100th Avenue.
Mr. Conolly remembers fondly his experience working at the mill in MacKenzie British Columbia prior to becoming a lawyer and loves the North Peace especially in the summer and fall.
MacLean Law Group Fort St John Law Office
Lorne MacLean and Doug Conolly suggest you consider the following before selecting your North Peace area personal injury and ICBC claim lawyer:
How to Find a Skilled Lawyer Who is Right for You
Choosing an experienced personal injury lawyer who will work well with you is an important first step in settling your claim. The right lawyer will give you peace of mind and ensure the best possible outcome.
Here are some tips to help you find a good lawyer or law firm:
1. Check their website. Is there information about individual lawyers? Do they have expertise in personal injury law? Is the website clear, professional and easy to use?
2. Contact them. Did you feel you were given the information you needed to get started? If you left a telephone message or sent an email inquiry, was the response prompt and professional?
3. Meet them. Many firms offer a free initial consultation (up to 1/2 hour). During that first meeting, did they listen? Did you feel comfortable asking questions and were your questions answered clearly? Who did most of the talking? Were fees and expenses discussed openly? Did you feel confident that this lawyer genuinely had your best interests at heart?
4. Ask tough questions. For example:
■”How much experience do you have as a personal injury lawyer?”
■”What percentage of your practice is devoted to personal injury law?”
■”Can you consult with other lawyers in your firm when necessary?”
■”Are you prepared to take this matter to trial if necessary?”
■”How many times have you appeared in court?”
■”What makes you a good negotiator? How do you reach a settlement?”
■”Do you have time to deal with my matter promptly and to follow through?”
■”Will anyone else work on my matter?”
■”What are your fees and what are my payment options?”
5. Ask for their retainer agreement. Review it carefully and ask for clarification on anything you don’t understand before agreeing to its terms.
6. If you have special needs, can the lawyer meet those needs?
Doug Conolly would love to discuss his experince and each of these questions with you at the eaarliest possible opportunity.
If you have been involved in a car accident call us at 250-262-5052
Call us at 250-262-5052 now to set up an appointment and get cutting edge strategies to ensure your claim is properly handled and you get the proper amount you are entitled to.
Lorne MacLean- BC Divorce Lawyer- Interviewed on CKNW Morning News 7:55AM June 22 2010 and Quoted in MacLean’s Magazine Today
Monday, June 21st, 2010
Lorne MacLean-Straight Shooting Lawyer Quoted by the Media on Tough Family Case
BC High Net Worth divorce lawyer Lorne MacLean is forthright and clear with his clients in discussing their cases. Mr. MacLean’s reputation as someone who can explain a family law case in simple and straightforward language that layman can appreciate has led him to be a popular guest on radio, TV and in the press. If you’re interested in obtaining legal representation for your high net worth divorce or family law case or have a case which is complex and difficult be sure to listen in tomorrow at 7:55 AM on Vancouver’s CKNW so that you can get a better feel for Mr. MacLean and then contact him at MacLean Family Law Group for an initial consultation at 604-602-9000. We also suggest you take a look at next week’s Maclean’s magazine article on MacLean’s latest venture to provide cutting-edge legal services to persons in Canada going through divorce or family breakdown.
MacLean Law Group Expands Practice Areas – BC ICBC Claims and BC Personal Injury and Motor Vehicle Accidents
Thursday, June 17th, 2010
Summer at Our Fort St John BC Office - Call Us for a Free ICBC Claim Consultation
Lorne MacLean, of the MacLean Law Group is pleased to announce a joint venture that provides experienced legal representation to Fort St John BC and Dawson Creek BC clients with legal issues involving ICBC and personal injury claims.
CLICK HERE TO GO DIRECTLY TO OUR ICBC AND PERSONAL CLAIMS WEBSITE
Starting immediately Doug Conolly a partner at McQuarrie Hunter in Vancouver, BC will assist the MacLean Law Group to provide expanded legal services to our clients in the North Peace.
Mr. Conolly will accept ICBC and personal injury claim work through our Fort St John BC office to provide access to the ICBC claim and personal injury law related resources of a mid size law firm while allowing clients convenient local access to these services at our Fort St John BC law office.
Doug grew up in Vancouver and worked in the construction industry throughout the Lower Mainland and Whistler, B.C., before obtaining his Bachelor of Arts from Simon Fraser University and Bachelor of Laws from the University of Alberta. He was called to the B.C. Bar in 2002 and is a member of the Canadian Bar Association, Law Society of British Columbia and the New Westminster Bar Association.Doug Conolly is available for appointments booked two weeks in advance at our Fort St John office and is also available by teleconference between out Fort St John office and his Surrey BC office.
Call us now at 1-250-262-5052 to book an appointment to meet with Doug Conolly.
Fields Just North of Fort St John in the Summer
Key Canadian Tax Decision Allows Deduction of Divorce and Family Law Legal Fees Related to BC Child Support
Monday, June 14th, 2010
Lorne MacLean -New Tax Deduction for Legal Fees to Claim BC Child Support
A new Tax Court ruling affecting BC child support legal fee deduction could help you save thousands provided your BC family law counsel is aware of this important development. Come see The BC child support lawyers at MacLean Family Law Group to learn more about how this important ruling affects you. In short a new case has expanded the class of people able to deduct legal fees to claim BC child support.
If you are seeking child support from you former spouse you are entitled to a CRA tax deduction of those legal fees against your income tax payable thanks to Trignani v. The Queen [2010] TCC 209.
In this case, the separating parent’s August 2000 agreement stipulated joint custody for the child and the appellant was to pay child support of $350/month. In May 2001 the Ontario Superior Court of Justice ordered that the appellant would have sole interim custody of the child with the spouse having interim access 50 percent of the time with supervision. And, the appellant was to continue to pay $350/month in child support.
For the majority of the time the appellant had physical custody of the child because appropriate supervision at the spouse’s residence was not available.
The Honourable Justice Judith Woods in her decision dated April 9, 2010 notes that as long as the person seeking, or pursuing child support against the other parent does not abandon their claim for child support before the relevant legal services were provided; and, that it has not been determined by a court that you do not have a pre-existing right to child support because that right was extinguished by a court order, then you are entitled to the deduction in computing your income.
It has generally been accepted that legal expenses incurred to obtain child support are deductible in computing income: Wakeman v. The Queen, [1996] 3 CTC 2585; McColl v. The Queen, 2000 DTC 2148; Sabour v. The Queen, [2002] 1 CTC 2585 (in obiter at para 9); and Rabb v. The Queen, [2006] 3 CTC 2266. This principle is also accepted by the Canada Revenue Agency, as evidenced by Interpretation Bulletin IT-99R5, at para 17.
With respect to child support, legal expenses have been considered to be on current account on the basis that there is a pre-existing right by virtue of a legislative obligation on each parent to support their children.
A note of caution must be raised: The person seeking child support or pursuing a claim for child support must be making a bona fide claim that is not frivolous, and must have a reasonable prospect of success. You will also need to have your lawyer keep track what portion of fees related to child custody and get a letter from them that sets out the correct amount.
BC Spousal Support Advisory Guidelines-SSAG- BC Support Success Story for MacLean Family Law Group-Pre Tax Profits Used For High Support
Sunday, June 13th, 2010
Lorne MacLean Vancouver BC spousal support guideline award and SSAG spousal support guidelines lawyer
Lorne MacLean BC SSAG support and spousal support guidelines lawyer, using the with child support spousal support advisory guideline formula, recently succeeded in obtaining a lucrative BC Spousal Support Advisory guideline ” SSAG” and BC child support guidelines award on behalf of his client, the wife, in a complex and high net worth BC spousal support guidelines and BC child support guidelines proceeding where a BC child support award of $8771 retroactive for 13 months (plus private school and extracurricular fess of roughly $3000 monthly) and a BC spousal support advisory guidelines award of $17714 was ordered meaning the combined monthly payments of spousal support advisory guidelines support and child support approached $30,000 per month. The award ranks as one of the highest court BC spousal support awards in BC since the SSAG spousal support calculations came into effect. Mr. MacLean succeeded in having the court use all of the companies pre-tax profits for the SSAG calculation based on BCCA law from the cases of Klukas and Teja, defeating the husband’s spousal support claim that double dipping applied to BC spousal support and a lower BC spousal and BC child support payment should thus be paid, blocking any $350,000 cap argument where BC spousal support is not increased on high salaries above $350,000 per year and finally in having the child support portion of the order made retroactive so a large lump sum payment was received for the children’s benefit. We were delighted to have achieved such a generous BC spousal support and BC child support result for our BC family law client.
For privacy reasons the case is referred to as A.R.J. v. Z.S.J. [2009] B.C.J. No. 2393, B.C.S.C. The brief facts are:
-Married for 16 years.
-Two children.
-Husband, a surgeon, was sole director and equal shareholder in his professional services corporation.
-A personal services corporation unlike a company involved in a riskier or more capital intensive maunufacturing business, generally speaking, does not require significant injections of capital in order to operate.
-Citing our Appellate case authority Mr Justice Savage determined that in the absence of legitimate calls on the pre-tax corporate income of a company, children and a spouse are entitled to support based on the full income available to the payor spouse.
-The double-dipping argument was rejected as it was the income earning capacity of the payor that gave rise to the assets in the company and this argument was not valid.
-No $350,000 cap would be used for the husband’s income which would have drastically lowered the wife’s support.
We look forward to helping high net worth spouses involved in complex family law cases.
A Happy Client gives Lorne MacLean a Great Birthday Cake
BC Grandparent Rights to Claim Child Custody Guardianship and Access to Their GrandChildren
Friday, June 11th, 2010
Mike Jukic MacLean Law Group's Fort St. John Divorce Lawyer
Grandpa and Grandma: Becoming Parents All Over Again
We have successfully represented BC grandparents in obtaining them custody guardianship, access and visitation rights.
Under section 35 of the Family Relations Act, any “person” or “persons” may be granted custody of or access to a child . The reference to “persons” in this section includes parents, grandparents, other relatives of the child, and persons who are not relatives of the child. On first glance, this section seems to give the courts wide ranging discretion to award custody of a child to whomever the court sees fit but this is not necessarily the case. The courts have articulated a “common sense” approach for custody disputes which holds that, all other matters being equal, a parent is entitled to raise their child.
In L. (A.) v. K. (D.), 2000 BCCA 455 , the British Columbia Court of Appeal reviewed the law in the area of third party claims to custody (meaning parties who are not the parents of the child in question) and found that parents are entitled to raise their children unless there is a clear finding of a reason why they cannot. In Chera v. Chera, 2008 BCCA, the Court of Appeal revisited the issue of third party custody once again and held that the entitlement of parents to raise their children does not create a presumption in favour of the parent. While there is no presumption in favour of a biological parent, the court will start with the common sense inference that parents should be entitled to raise their own children. The grandparent or other third party must show the court that the parent or parents of the child cannot discharge their parental duties effectively and then show the court that the best interests of the child would be most served by placing the child in their care.
Under the Family Relations Act, the court must give paramount consideration to the best interests of the child taking into consideration the factors enumerated in section 24 which are the health and emotional well being of the child, the views of the child if appropriate, the love, affection and similar ties that exist between the child and other persons, education and training for the child, and the capacity of each person seeking custody and their ability to exercise the rights and duties that come with custody. While the court cannot predict the future with certainty, it must make its best judgment as to which course of action for a child appears to hold the fewest risks.
The courts have granted custody to a third party where it would be in the best interests of the child. The circumstances include, but are not be limited to:
1. Where the child had developed a strong bond with the third party (T.E.K. v. British Columbia (Superintendent of Family and Child Service), [1996] B.C.J. No. 900 (QL) (S.C.));
2. Where there is risk to a child living with the birth parents (J.T. v. British Columbia (Superintendent of Family and Child Service), [1994] B.C.J. No. 3109 (QL).
If you are a grandparent seeking custody of a grandchild, please call 604-602-9000 to book an initial consultation with a lawyer at the MacLean Family Law Group.
Lorne MacLean Quoted on BC Parental Support in Macleans Magazine June 18th Edition
Friday, June 11th, 2010
Check out the Macleans Magazine article and read Lorne MacLean’s explanation of how parental support claims can be made in BC. MacLean feels the section should be abolished as it is anachronistic, most children already voluntarily support parents in need and it makes no economic sense to open old family wounds considering most children are struggling to support their own spouse and children in today’s tough economy.