Donate Child Support Calculator
Skip navigation

bizarre hearing outcome ?

Hi,
    I recently appeared at a hearing in FCWA and to my surprise neither party had legal representation, yet the magistrate stated that if we could not come to some agreement outside the courtroom using a mediator the hearing would be adjourned so the other party could seek some legal representation. The other party had legal rep prior to the hearing but about 5 working days before the hearing they filed a notice of ceasing to act  on the grounds of a conflict of interest. This legal firm had represented the other party for at least 12 months prior, regarding the same matter. I was at a loss to understand this and still am. Am I able to find out the reason for the conflict of interest through the courts, and if so how do I go about this ? Also is that the usual protocol when both parties are not represented and one party would like legal rep ? No new orders were made and nothing changed at this hearing, which I found bizarre and left me wondering how this could happen.
My circumstances had changed prior to the previous hearing ( I had relocated to another town ) which was 3 months prior to this most recent hearing, those matters were discussed at the previous hearing, without any change to the orders. The same matters were discussed at the most recent hearing, but the magistrate was not prepared to step in and change/ amend the interim orders in anyway.

some input would be good.
spock said
The other party had legal rep prior to the hearing but about 5 working days before the hearing they filed a notice of ceasing to act on the grounds of a conflict of interest. This legal firm had represented the other party for at least 12 months prior, regarding the same matter. I was at a loss to understand this and still am. Am I able to find out the reason for the conflict of interest through the courts, and if so how do I go about this ?
The short answer is NO. Why is this important to you, how would it help you case? you are losing focus.
spock said
Also is that the usual protocol when both parties are not represented and one party would like legal rep ? No new orders were made and nothing changed at this hearing, which I found bizarre and left me wondering how this could happen.
My circumstances had changed prior to the previous hearing ( I had relocated to another town ) which was 3 months prior to this most recent hearing, those matters were discussed at the previous hearing, without any change to the orders. The same matters were discussed at the most recent hearing, but the magistrate was not prepared to step in and change/ amend the interim orders in anyway.
If the other party was previously represented (you say yes) and lost their representation a few days before the hearing this would not be unusual for a postponement since the Court would be facing two SRLs, one of which is sometimes bad enough for some Courts. With the chance of at least one legal representative to get a hearing moving smoothly the Court has opted for this.

What sort of hearing was it? A mention or a hearing at which orders could be made?




SRL-Resources. the Family Law People on this site (look for the Avatars) www.srl-resources.org  Non gender Professional and peer support for SRLs. Closed site, no public forums, no search engines, no lurkers, guests or the other side and their Lawyer and Friends.
 I dont feel I'm losing focus, but like the saying goes if you dont ask you'll never know, I think the more questions I have answered it will allow me to better understand this system, and what to do and what not to do when the situation arises.  I'm sure that this is possibly a common occurence then the conflict of interest  ?

 thanks spock
1 guest and 0 members have just viewed this.

Recent Tweets