When will Alberta embrace unified family courts?
With federal funding still on offer, the province needs to commit soon.
The idea of a unified family court dates back to 1974 as a solution to address inefficiencies, higher legal costs, and difficulties related to overlapping jurisdiction between provincial courts and, here in Alberta, the Court of King’s Bench. Since that time, several provinces have set up UFCs, including Manitoba, New Brunswick, Saskatchewan, Newfoundland & Labrador, Nova Scotia, Prince Edward Island and Ontario. There are currently 39 unified family courts in operation across the country.
Alberta should be the next province to constitute a UFC, according to Wayne Barkauskas, a past president of the Alberta Branch of the CBA and past chair of the CBA National Family Law Section – particularly as Alberta was supposed to have implemented a Unified Family Court in 2020 after the federal government had committed to funding 17 judicial positions in the province. “This was significant as Alberta’s allotment of Superior Court Judges is amongst the lowest per capita in the country,” says Barkauskas, adding that it would have freed up court resources that were in desperately short supply.
Sonja Lusignan, a lawyer based in Calgary, says the UFC model offers a comprehensive approach to resolving family disputes bringing all aspects of family law under one roof. “It provides a one-stop-shop model for families to resolve their legal issues,” she says. That way, families don’t have to navigate multiple court systems to resolve their differences, she adds. “This includes issues such as child and spousal support, property division, parenting time and decision-making disputes (what was formerly known as “custody”), and child protection matters. One goal of this model is to streamline the legal process and improve access to justice for families that are going through these difficult disputes. The idea of a UFC for Albertans has been discussed since at least 1978.”
Barkauskas had been involved in discussions regarding the new unified family court system during his mandates as Alberta CBA President and section chair. Then two things happened. First, the 2019 Alberta election resulted in a change in government. Second, the deterioration of the Alberta economy put financial pressure on the new government. “Although the federal government had committed to pay for new judicial positions, the province would have to fund much of the resulting support staff and other associated costs,” says Barkauskas. “While many arguments were voiced that there would also be offsetting cost savings in other areas, the provincial government announced in February of 2020, to the shock of the Alberta Family bar, that UFC was being placed on hold.” The Court of King’s Bench had already completed planning to implement the UFC.
According to Barkauskas, there has been “no movement at all towards reinstating the planning and implementation” of a unified family court in Alberta. That should be cause for concern, he says. ‘First, the federal government had promised funding for certain provinces (including Alberta) in order to implement UFCs, but only if they did so by the spring of 2023.” Ottawa’s commitment will expire unless it decides to extend it.
“The second critical issue is the continued deterioration of services offered by the Alberta family law court system, especially at the King’s Bench level,” says Barkauskas. “Trial dates for a moderately lengthy trial of five or more days are now not available for three to four years in Calgary. Even chambers dates for hearings for interim orders with only affidavit evidence are being scheduled 6-12 months in the future.”
Barkauskas says the impact on families is devastating. “Delaying a trial for years increases costs to the family exponentially. Many interim crises develop while families wait. Information changes over this time require constant updates. The stress on the family resulting from unresolved issues increases mental health issues for family members, the stress contributes to other health issues and, additionally, it often leaves children in the middle of a battle zone for years.” People don’t have the means to afford to pay lawyers for all that time and so resort to representing themselves, “thereby adding even more stress to the legal system.”
Another key characteristic of the unified family court model is that its judges are specialized in family law and dispute resolution. This would ensure that lawyers would receive specialized direction from the court, helping to expedite the process of resolving family law disputes. A UFC would make it easier for lawyers to access court documents and other related information. What’s more, lawyers have a single point of contact, making it easier to coordinate with the court through a streamlined process and increase. All of this helps litigants save time and money, says Lusignan, and leads to a smoother resolution process and improved outcomes for clients.
“Currently, the Provincial Court of Alberta has jurisdiction over some matters, while the Court of King’s Bench has jurisdiction over other matters,” says Barkauskas. In some cases, both levels of court can have jurisdiction depending on where a party files their action, which makes it difficult for parties, many of them self-represented, to maneuver. “It leads to increased costs for the government and clients,” he says, and “to a lack of confidence in the justice system.”
“Ultimately, the most important and compelling reason for a unified family court model is that it would simply be best for Alberta families, because both the process and outcome would be improved,” says Lusignan. There would be subject-matter experts available to families who feel overwhelmed, and who are often unable to afford legal services yet do not qualify for legal aid, and who are coming to court as their final option.
