Family Law Court - Who goes first

Evd-Burner

Hi All,

I've been down this road a few times in the district courts but I have always been the applicant and except for one other time where we agreed outside of court I have had representation.

Now I am the respondent and I no longer have a solicitor. In all previous cases where we couldn't come to an agreement I would have been called to the stand first. Am I correct in saying that if I am now the respondent that the other party must be called to the stand first?

I would be very great full if somebody could explain how it works so I can know what to expect.

FYI - I am now representing myself as using a solicitor on a yearly basis is turning out to be to expensive.

Thanks.

Peregrinus

Yes. Generally the applicant goes first to say why they have brought the application and what they want out of it. Then the respondent goes to respond to that and (usually) to say why the applicant should not get what they are seeking.

Evd-Burner

Peregrinus wrote: »

Yes. Generally the applicant goes first to say why they have brought the application and what they want out of it. Then the respondent goes to respond to that and (usually) to say why the applicant should not get what they are seeking.

Thanks for that, it's what I was thinking.

So when the applicant goes up I will be given a chance to question them?

When I go up will I be firstly questioned by the applicants solicitor and then given a chance to essentially question myself?

Mr. Incognito

No- you wont get a chance to question yourself.

You will give oral evidence on your feet.

Your opposing solicitor will cross examine you and probably rip you to shreds.

Get a solicitor.

Evd-Burner

Mr. Incognito wrote:

Your opposing solicitor will cross examine you and probably rip you to shreds.

I've not met one family law solicitor who can even get their facts straight, either mine or the opposing side, perhaps if most of them didn't have multiple clients on the day they were bouncing between then maybe they wouldn't be as bad. There were questions asked of me before that made absolutely no sense whatsoever to our case and were clearly from someone else's notes!

I'm more than capable of handling a solicitor while up on the stand. Facts are facts at the end of the day, its a family law court and not a criminal one.

taytobreath

Is this for getting access to a child?

Peregrinus

Evd-Burner wrote: »

Thanks for that, it's what I was thinking.

So when the applicant goes up I will be given a chance to question them?

Yes.

Evd-Burner wrote: »

When I go up will I be firstly questioned by the applicants solicitor and then given a chance to essentially question myself?

`
No. When it's your turn you get to say your piece first. Then the applicant's solicitor gets to cross-examine you.

Evd-Burner

taytobreath wrote:

Is this for getting access to a child?

Ammendments to current access and maintenance agreements.

Peregrinus wrote:

` No. When it's your turn you get to say your piece first. Then the applicant's solicitor gets to cross-examine you.

Thanks. I'll prepare based on that and ensure i say everything I have to say before the opposing solicitor starts.

taytobreath

Just to clarify and apologies to the op for going off topic slightly. If a man or woman is applying for child access does he have to answer questions or get a grilling from the opposing solicitor if for example the access is been contested.

Peregrinus

taytobreath wrote: »

Just to clarify and apologies to the op for going off topic slightly. If a man or woman is applying for child access does he have to answer questions or get a grilling from the opposing solicitor if for example the access is been contested.

Yes, potentially.

Turn this around. If someone takes court proceedings asking the court to order you to do something (or not to do something), are you entitled to have your say in court about the order sought, and to cross-examine witnesses who are called to support the making of the order? Yes, you are.

barman linen

How would this work in a divorce...? I am the applicant and the respondent has some issues on maintenance.

Do I outline my reasons for divorce or can I ask questions of the applicant to support my oral presentation ?

Do I have to wait to be cross examined and then I further cross examine the respondent ?

Example - respondent is seeking spousal maintenance and I want to illustrate that she is working - always has worked - and is capable of maintaining herself. How would I get that in ? Do I list her working career or do I have to question her at some stage to elicit the responses as evidence ?

( info - our salaries are at equal levels )