Sentences with phrase «order granting exclusive»

Both the Family Law Act and the Matrimonial Property Act are silent about the status of a perpetrator who was a tenant or co-tenant at the time an order granting exclusive possession to the victim was made, so it is likely the perpetrator will continue to be a tenant.

With an EPO or QBPO, it would seem that the perpetrator remains a tenant if the PAFVA and the RTA are read together — unless the victim with the protection order granting exclusive possession of the residential premises is not a tenant and chooses to assume the responsibilities of the tenant under section 9 (3) of the PAVFA.

Does the victim of domestic violence with a protection order granting exclusive possession need the consent of the landlord to change the locks?

Is the perpetrator who was a tenant or co-tenant at the time a protection order granting exclusive possession to the victim was made, still a «tenant» under the RTA?

If a victim with a protection order granting exclusive possession of the residential premises is not a tenant and does not choose to assume the responsibilities of the tenant under section 9 (3) of the PAVFA, then the perpetrator will still have all of the responsibilities of a tenant, even though out of possession.

Nevertheless, protection orders grant exclusive possession.

Not exact matches

Has been granted restraining order requires ex Corey Bohan stay 100 ft exclusive sneak peek at patridges holiday gift guide.

Yeah, in order to be in Kindle Unlimited, you have to enroll your book in KDP Select, which grants Amazon exclusive rights on your book.

The court may order that a petitioner be granted the exclusive custody or control of any pet owned, possessed, leased, kept, or held by the petitioner, respondent, or minor child residing with either the petitioner or respondent and may prohibit the respondent from interfering with the petitioner's efforts to remove the pet.

The law now allows a judge to grant the petitioner of a protective order exclusive care, custody, or control of any animal owned, possessed, leased, kept, or held by the victim, the abuser, or a minor child in the household; the law also allows a judge to order the abuser to stay away from the pet in both temporary and final domestic violence protective orders.

Iowa now allows the court to grant petitioners exclusive care, possession, or control of any pets or companion animals in both temporary and permanent orders.

The only things somewhat similar to this that courts can do are (a) «bed and board divorces» granted by the Circuit Court, and (b) orders saying which party gets to have exclusive use of the couple's home, often granted at the same time as initial temporary support orders.

If your matter goes through the court system then one party can be granted exclusive possession on a temporary basis by way of a court order.

In deciding whether or not to grant an Exclusive Possession Order, the court will consider:

Section 24 (1) of the Family Law Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. F. 3, empowers the Court to grant an order for exclusive possession regardless of ownership of the matrimonial home.

A Court can grant an Order for exclusive possession even without a threat of danger present.

There are other open questions about how the RTA is affected by the different protection orders, particularly when the perpetrator was a tenant or co-tenant of the residential premises at the time a protection order was made that granted the victim exclusive possession of those premises.

Section 24 of the Matrimonial Property Act says essentially the same thing for married persons granted exclusive possession orders under that Act:

It states that anyone who is granted exclusive occupation of the family home under sections 16 - 18, 20 or 21 is bound by the lease on the family home during the period of the order.

Once the victim is granted exclusive possession under a protection or other court order for a specified period of time, then during that period of time the perpetrator would almost certainly have no right to a key or access to the residential premises, regardless of what the RTA says.

In Alberta, it would be better to amend the PAFVA and the other legislation under which exclusive possession of residential premises can be granted rather than amend the RTA, because what is needed is a comprehensive list of matters to be considered by the parties and the courts in granting a protection order, or at least the QBPOs.

As a practical matter, victims of domestic violence who are granted protection orders providing for conditions such as exclusive occupation or possession of the family home should advise their landlords of such, and preferably provide them with a copy of the order, particularly if they wish to change the locks or make arrangements to take over the residential tenancy agreement.

In Potter v Boston, the Court examined an application by the husband who sought leave to appeal an interim order that granted his wife exclusive possession of a condominium, which was owned by the husband and located in Florida, for one week every month.

(a) Title 38 U.S.C. § 3107 (a)(2), which gives the VA discretionary authority to apportion disability compensation on behalf of a veteran's children, is not an exclusive grant of authority to the VA to order that child support be paid from disability benefits, and does not indicate that exercise of the VA's discretion could yield independent child support determinations in conflict with existing state court orders.

On the other hand, the cases also appear to point to commercial rights being intrinsically connected to, and in fact requiring, exclusive possession in order to be granted as a native title right or interest.

With that in mind, the Family Code § 6320 specifically allows a court to grant exclusive care of any animal to a single party and may even issue a restraining order against the other party to prevent the abuse or abduction of the pet.