Donate Child Support Calculator
Skip navigation

Discussions with other side's lawyer - is it admissable

I am curious to know is comments made during general conversation with other parties lawyer allowed to be refereed to in an affidavit?
I know about hearsay evidence but in general is that conversation allowed as evidence?
I said something to ex's barrister on the court date on first meeting him, well it was more a polite response to a mistake he made in conversation that related to something in my personal life - this is nothing that is in anyway negative about me but my ex has included this conversation in his affidavit - for what purpose I am not sure as it has no bearing in any manner.
My intrigue is if this is actually allowed and if so am I allowed to make a comment in affidavit if there was a statement made by ex's barrister to me that may have bearing on the case?
Just there was a comment by ex's barrister to me quite some time ago, it has no bearing now but it has got me curious of whether this is normally allowed or if this is ex and his lawyer playing every card they can.?

Hope didn't lose anyone here.

Discussions with other side's lawyer - is it admissable

After a court appearance with CSA and other sides Lawyer, my wife and I were told by CSA we needed to have a discussion.

I was SRL, they asked my wife to also join they meeting.

Two CSA staff and I gather their Legal, who sat outside the court room and lent against the wall very quietly throughout the meeting.

Other sides Lawyer drilled me, made accusations, demanded I give ex $20,000.00 and she might let me travel for work placement in UK.

Lawyer demanded to know where my wife kept her horses and accused me of abandoning my kids.

I did lash out and said are you stupid. He was quite offended.

The entire time CSA sat back and took notes.

I wonder what they wrote????

The barristers not giving evidence, is he? So what ever he says doesn't really count for anything, does it?

Janus, I have read youre other post re arrears etc.

I would suggest the notes taken were to the effect of  …. he is able to come up with 20k at a moments notice and his wife owns horses and property but its hidden… lets nail this so n so and make repayments  at a level where he cannot afford to see his kids

If we do this he will cough up the dough and we'll get our bonuses. Cos really at the end of the day he is just another deadbeat dad who doesnt want to pay and puts everything in his wife's name so we cant get to it. and dont forget the line they write that says this poor mother  she has to stay home and look after her teenagers so cant work and look at him can afford a suit for court sitting there all smug with his new wife while the old  wife is suffering .

who knows what they were writing but I sure as hell can guess it wasnt in your favour.

I cannot recall anything in my dealings with CSa where they didnt get me back if something went in my favour … complain to mp or ombudsman or win at ssat level they come down harder and seemingly spend days or weeks concentrating on getting you back with  one of those grey areas of the act.

You can fool some of the people some of the time but you cant fool all of the people all of  the time unless they work for CSA and youre a Payee:)

I don't doubt any of what you have said. It would be an interesting FOI folio.

Will complain though and keep complaining. Will get knocked down again, of that I sure, while CSA dominate our rights and obstruct those of our children.

CSA have separated me from my children for financial gain.

 I have 2 boys and 2 girls and no doubt they will have children, (hopefully).

I can only hope that not giving up, will make life better for my children as adults, should any of them find themselves separated with children.
I was just curious if this is acceptable, like if it happened again could I bring up a comment made by ex's barrister if it had bearing on the case.
I don't care about his comment I made to the barrister even though he wrote it in affidavit as if I said it to him because it has no bearing on the case, it is just him trying to get at me.
it's not getting to me, it's just out of interest I wanted to know.
The only facts that matter are the facts in evidence. If a Barrister makes a statement that assumes a fact not in evidence then object.

1 guest and 0 members have just viewed this.

Recent Tweets