DUECKMAN v DUECKMAN, 2013 ABCA 306
O'BRIEN, MCDONALD and O'FERRALL JJA
4.19: Documents resulting from judicial dispute resolution
The Appellant appealed an Order entered following a Judicial Dispute Resolution (“JDR”). The Appellant and Respondent married in 1986 and divorced in 2007. They had three children; one was under the age of 18. In January 2013, the Appellant filed an Application seeking to vary custody and support; the Respondent filed a cross-motion seeking to vary access and further relief. The Case Management Judge ordered that all outstanding matters be dealt with in a special one-day Chambers Hearing, after attempting Alternative Dispute Resolution. The Parties attended the JDR meeting. The self-represented Appellant refused to sign a form of Binding Judicial Dispute Resolution Agreement tendered by the Respondent, so the JDR was non-binding.
The Court stated that the Judge may facilitate discussion, and if the Parties reached an agreement, the Rules contemplated documentation pursuant to Rule 4.19. In this case, there was no agreement prepared between the Parties nor was there a Consent Order or Consent Judgment. Because the Appellant claimed that there was no agreement and did not agree to the terms of the Order, the Court allowed the Appeal and set aside the Order made by the JDR Judge. The Court ordered that the case be returned to the Court of Queen’s Bench for the scheduling of a Special Chambers Application.View CanLII Details