Today the NSRLP releases the latest in its series of research reports drawing on the data we are collecting and analyzing in the SRL Case Law Database.
To Refresh Your Memory
The SRL Case Law Database is an ongoing project of the NSRLP. Our team of research assistants are steadily working back in time from the present to identify cases with either one or both sides self-represented, and which offer insight into emerging jurisprudence across Canada involving one or more of the following issues:
- Understanding of “vexatiousness” (both formal and informal) as applied to SRLs
- Issues of procedural fairness for SRLs
- Accommodation requests by SRLs
- Cost awards either in favour of, or (where these appear punitive), against SRLs
Appropriate cases are first identified by a research assistant using a search strategy (developed in partnership with WestLaw Canada). Once a case has been identified, a different team member analyzes it using a series of standard questions (including area of law, facts, legal reasoning, outcome, province and court level, judge, other information about the SRL e.g. plaintiff/defendant, gender, and a section for “other observations”) using a survey created in Survey Monkey. Survey Monkey data is regularly transferred to a spreadsheet to allow us to review, correlate and further analyse patterns.
A Resource for All Justice System Participants
It is our hope that the SRL Case Law Database will become a valuable resource for all those participating in the legal system, whether as a litigant, a lawyer, a scholar, or as a member of the judiciary. We believe that it fills a gap in systematic analysis and evaluation of case law that responds to the phenomenon of self-representation, by demonstrating what decisions are being made and how these are reasoned. Our first research report, Costs Awards for Self-Represented Litigants (Lidia Imbrogno & Julie Macfarlane, April 2018), tracks the evolution of judicial reasoning on how to award costs beyond expenses to successful SRLs and shows the evolution of judicial thinking on this topic (What value is placed on a SRL’s time? And should this be a quantification of time, or of work?).
Addressing Our Judges
The research report we are releasing today is the work of RA Sandra Shushani, Windsor Law 2018. Today’s report focuses on characterizations of female SRL behavior by judges that reflect well-known gendered stereotypes.
We offer this report to members of the judiciary in the sincere hope that our careful, systematic observations and the examples provided will be helpful to them in identifying and responding to another challenge raised by the influx of SRLs into the courts – less a doctrinal matter than an evaluation of motivations and behavior. Without lawyers standing in front of litigants presenting their legal arguments, our judges must assess and respond directly to members of the public presenting their own case. It is inevitable, we would suggest, that this appraisal may sometimes inadvertently reflect assumptions about how men and women behave – or should behave.
There may be some judges who feel offended by the implied criticism of their objectivity. To which we would say, please read our report and treat its observations as a contribution to your effective and fair management of SRLs in your courtrooms. We hope that you can accept this new report in that spirit, and please give us your feedback and comments.
in my case, it was stated that I was just after my childs father for the money. since this was a child support application, I am confused by this. I was then trying to get full disclosure of the evidence in the dna file, and examine the witnesses, I assumed this was normal. apparently if you are “just after him for the money”. no. I also pointed out repeatedly to the court that he had in affidavit form, sworn that he owned nothing, and made approx. 50, thousand a year. I asked repeatedly what was meant by after him for the money, since he claimed to have none, and it was a child support application. no one ever answered, they just kept throwing the same statement at me over and over. how can you establish anything truthfully when you are dealing with this sort of behavior?
Sandra even if you were after the money, you were merely after what is due ti you for your child.
I won’t even talk about the insults I endured at the hands of very aweful judges but one, the incompetent one who by the longest jumps and leaps of logic declared me vexatious referred to my daughter as being “involved in a brawl” and pretty much implied that she was no more than a brawler.: My daughter had to fight to fend of a rather disturbed and unfortunate lad at school. (He killed someone 2 weeks later) and his mom and big sister in trying to break up the fight got carried away and ended up being involved in the fight too. In that case a judge saw fit to grant me a gag Order against the school board and minister so that my child to go back to school and the CJ had to come out to the court room once to put 2 rogues lawyers in line and the court of appeal saw fit to grant us a meeting with the judge after all that this judge decided to review the higher court decision and another judges decision to determine that my daughter was a brawler and my action of fighting for my child to get the education she has a right to he saw as my being vexatious.
I got the distinct impression from that judge that women should be seen but not heard for to dare to speak means you do something wrong. I will not even bother to mention the us eof the tactics of provocation used against women SRLs to justify abusing us in courtrooms