Overview of the Family Statute Law Amendment Act, 2006
| Author | Anne Marie Predko and John D. Gregory |
| Pages | 1-20 |
Overview
of the
Family
Statute
Law
Amendment
Act,
2006
Anne
Marie
Predko
and
John
D.
Gregory"
A.
INTRODUCTION
The
Attorney General introduced
the
Family
Statute
Law
Amendment
Act,
2006
on 15
November
2005
as
Bill
27.
After
debate
in the
legislature dur-
ing the
fall
session,
the
Standing Committee
on
General Government
held public hearings
in
January
2006
and
made some significant changes.
The
legislature passed
the
Bill
as
amended
in
February; Royal Assent
was
given
on 23
February. Most
of the
components
of the
Act,
including
the
changes
to the
rules
for
family
arbitrations, will
not
come into
effect
until regulations
are
made.
The
Ministry
is
working with interested per-
sons
and
groups
to
develop regulations under
the
Act, 1991.
This
paper provides
an
overview
of the
policy development process
leading
up to the
recent legislation
and the
main policy questions
faced
by the
government.
It
then examines
in
detail
the
components
of the Act
and the
statutes that
it
amends.
Anne
Marie
Predko
is
Counsel
and
John
D.
Gregory
is
General Counsel with
the
Ministry
of the
Attorney General.
1
2
ANNE MARIE PREDKO
AND
JOHN
D.
GREGORY
B.
POLICY
DEVELOPMENT
PROCESS
The
Family
Statute
Law
Amendment
Act,
2006
is the
Ontario government's
response
to
Marion
Boyd's
report1
on the use of
arbitration
in
family
law
disputes.
The
Attorney General, Michael
Bryant,
and the
Minister
Responsible
for
Women's
Issues, Sandra Pupatello, decided
in
June
2004
to
commission Marion Boyd
to
study
the
issue
of the use of
arbitration
in
family
law and
inheritance cases,
and
make recommendations.
Ms.
Boyd
had
held both ministerial portfolios
in the
19905
and had a
solid
record
of
commitment
to
women's equality. During
the
summer
and
fall
of
2004,
Ms.
Boyd
met
with
a
wide range
of
groups
and
individuals
who
had an
interest
in the use of
arbitration
in
family
law
matters. Because
the
issue
had
come
to the
attention
of
government through concerns
from
Muslim women's organizations about
the use of
Islamic personal
law in
arbitration,
Ms.
Boyd made particular
effort
to
reach
out to the
Muslim
community. However,
she
also
met
with representatives
of
several Jew-
ish
organizations, including
the
Rabbinical Court
in
Toronto,
and
with
Christian groups
who
expressed
interest.2
Legal
and
arbitral organiza-
tions,
including
the
Ontario
Bar
Association, County
and
District
Law
Presidents'
Association, Advocates' Society, Family Mediation Canada,
and ADR
Canada were specifically invited
to
participate
in the
consulta-
tion process.
In
addition,
Ms.
Boyd directly solicited
the
views
of
senior
family
law
practitioners
who act as
arbitrators
in
these cases.
Ms.
Boyd
issued
her
report
in
late December
2004.
The
Boyd
Report
made
forty-six
recommendations concerning
the
conduct
and
content
of
family
arbitrations.
In
general,
the
report
was
quite positive about
the
benefits
of
arbitration, particularly where there were remaining
issues
in
dispute that
had
defied
negotiated settlement. Arbitration
was
presented
as
less expensive, more conciliatory,
faster,
and
more private
for
dispu-
tants
who
were committed
to
resolving their dispute.
The
Boyd Report
recommended that both regular
and
faith-based arbitration
of
family
disputes
be
permitted
to
continue
in
Ontario, subject
to the
safeguards
that
Ms.
Boyd
recommended.
One of the
most interesting elements
of the
Boyd
Report
was its re-
framing
of
some
of the
contentious issues that
had
been reported
up
until
that point
in the
legal
and
mainstream press.
For
example,
in
November
1
Dispute
Resolution
in
Family
Law:
Protecting
Choice,
Promoting
Inclusion
(Toronto: Min-
istry
of the
Attorney
General,
2004),
online:
www.attorneygeneral.jus.gov.on.ca/eng-
lish/about/pubs/boyd/
[Boyd
Report].
2
Full
listings
of the
groups
and
individuals consulted appear
at
Appendices
II and
III
to the
Boyd
Report.
To continue reading
Request your trial