French v. McColeman
Because the OCL failed to serve its materials on a self-represented appellant, proceeding would be unfair; the appeal was therefore adjourned and the OCL was ordered to pay $1,000 to each party for wasted attendance.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- 2015 ONCA 807
- Parties
- Appellant: Julie Michelle French; Respondent: Michael Allan McColeman; Intervener: Office of the Children’s Lawyer
- Court
- Court of Appeal for Ontario
- Jurisdiction
- Canada
- Judgment Date
- 24 November 2015
- Procedural Posture
- Family / Court of Appeal Hearing; Adjourned
- Outcome
- Appeal adjourned to December 9, 2015; costs awarded against the Office of the Children’s Lawyer.
- Legal Topics
- Adjournment, Service of Court Materials, Wasted Attendance Costs, Children's Lawyer Participation
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Julie Michelle French
Appellant
Michael Allan McColeman
Respondent
Office of the Children’s Lawyer
Intervener
Procedural Posture
Family / Court of Appeal Hearing; Adjourned
Legal Issues
- 1 OCL failed to serve its materials on the self-represented appellant
- 2 Whether fairness requires adjournment of the appeal
- 3 Whether OCL should pay costs for wasted attendance
Ratio Decidendi
Because the OCL failed to serve its materials on a self-represented appellant, proceeding would be unfair; the appeal was therefore adjourned and the OCL was ordered to pay $1,000 to each party for wasted attendance.
Court Disposition
Appeal adjourned to December 9, 2015; costs awarded against the Office of the Children’s Lawyer.
Orders
- The appeal is adjourned to December 9, 2015, to be argued peremptorily.
- The Office of the Children’s Lawyer shall pay $1,000 to the appellant and $1,000 to the respondent within 30 days for costs of today’s attendance, inclusive of disbursements and taxes.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
French v. McColeman Collection Decisions of the Court of Appeal Date 2015-11-24 Neutral citation 2015 ONCA 807 Docket numbers C60475 Judges Cronk, Eleanore Ann; Epstein, Gloria Jean; Huscroft, Grant Subject Family Decision Content COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO CITATION: French v. McColeman, 2015 ONCA 807 DATE: 20151123 DOCKET: C60475 Cronk, Epstein and Huscroft JJ.A. BETWEEN Julie Michelle French Appellant and Michael Allan McColeman Respondent Julie French, in person Robert Bickle, for the respondent Inga Rinne, for the Office of the Children’s Lawyer Heard: November 12, 2015 On appeal from the order of Justice John R. Belleghem of the Superior Court of Justice, dated September 3, 2014. APPEAL BOOK ENDORSEMENT [1] At the outset of oral argument of this appeal, counsel for the Office of the Children’s Lawyer (the “OCL”) informed the court that, for reasons that are unclear, the OCL’s materials (including two facta) were never served on the appellant by the process server/agency requested to do so. They were, however, properly served on the respondent. [2] The unfairness in proceeding with argument of the appeal in these circumstances is apparent, especially since the appellant is a self-represented litigant. [3] We conclude that the interests of justice and fairness require that this appeal be adjourned to the first available date. That date, we are informed by court staff, is December 9, 2015. Accordingly, the appeal is adjourned to December 9, 2015, to be argued on that date, peremptory to all parties. [4] In the unusual circumstances requiring this last-minute adjournment of the appeal, it is, in our view, appropriate that the OCL bear some responsibility for the costs thrown away of today’s attendance. The appellant and the respondent are each entitled to the costs of today’s attendance, payable by the OCL, in the amount of $1,000, inclusive of disbursements and all applicable taxes. These costs are to be paid to the appellant and the respondent within 30 days from today’s date. [5] Finally, we note that the OCL’s counsel has confirmed to the court that she has now provided a copy of the OCL’s materials to the appellant.