Sentences with phrase «victim exclusive possession»

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.

Not exact matches

Once circumstances allow, victims of domestic violence should seek the advice of a family law lawyer to ensure their rights are protected with respect to issues such as exclusive possession of the family home, child custody and access, property division and child support.

Once circumstances allow, victims of domestic violence should seek the advice of a family law lawyer to ensure their rights are protected with respect to issues such as exclusive possession of the family home,

Nevertheless, amendments to the PAFVA and the other legislation under which exclusive possession of residential premises can be granted seems to be the better way to go, as they should provide better access to the relevant law for victims of domestic violence and those assisting them.

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.

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?

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

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.

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.

However, regardless of whether the victim is also a tenant or not, the perpetrator who is a tenant is entitled to keys and to access unless the victim has a protection order with a condition for exclusive possession of the residential premises under the Protection Against Family Violence Act, RSA 2000, c P - 27 (PAFVA) or other legislation discussed by Professor Koshan.

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.

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.

However, an EPO that grants exclusive possession of residential premises to the victim grants the victim the ability to remain in the premises and bar access to the perpetrator, which logically includes the ability to change or add to locks and other security devices.