這是前些日子爆出已經被加拿大法院接理對藏傳佛教噶舉派法王的訟訴。(加拿大法院鏈接在此:https://www.bccourts.ca/jdb-txt/sc/21/09/2021BCSC0939cor1.htm?fbclid=IwAR2FLZlzmUIGTBaTuKPVchEqqngcE3Qy6G_C0TWNWVKa2ksbIYkVJVMQ8f8)
這位法王的桃色事件,我是幾年前才聽到。但,藏傳佛教的高層有這些性醜聞,我已經聽了幾十年。我以前的一位前女友也被一些堪布藉故上她的家摟抱過,也有一些活佛跟她表白。(這不只是她,其他地方我也聽過不少)
這是一個藏傳佛教裡面系統式的問題。
很多時候發生這種事情,信徒和教主往往都是說女方得不到寵而報仇,或者說她們也精神病,或者說她們撒謊。
我不排除有這種可能性,但,多過一位,甚至多位出來指證的時候,我是傾向於相信『沒有那麼巧這麼多有精神病的女人要撒謊來報仇』。
大寶法王的桃色事件,最先吹哨的是一位台灣的在家信徒,第二位是香港的女出家人,現在加拿大又多一位公開舉報上法庭。
對大寶法王信徒來說,這一次的比較麻煩,因為是有孩子的。(關於有孩子的,我早在法王的桃色事件曝光時,就有聽聞)
如果法庭勒令要驗證DNA,這對法王和他的信徒來說,會很尷尬和矛盾,因為做或不做,都死。
你若問我,我覺得『人數是有力量的』,同時我也覺得之後有更多的人站出來,是不出奇的。
我也藉此呼籲各方佛教徒,如果你們真的愛佛教,先別說批判,但如鴕鳥般不討論這些爭議,你是間接害了佛教。
(下面是我從加拿大法院鏈接拷貝下來的內容,當中有很多細節。)
Table of Contents
INTRODUCTION
BACKGROUND
ANALYSIS
A. The Spousal Support Claim in this Case
B. The Test to Amend Pleadings
C. Pleadings in Family Law Cases
D. The Legal Concept of a Marriage-Like Relationship
E. Is There a Reasonable Claim of a Marriage-Like Relationship?
F. Delay / Prejudice
CONCLUSION
INTRODUCTION
[1] The claimant applies to amend her notice of family claim to seek spousal support. At issue is whether the claimant’s allegations give rise to a reasonable claim she lived with the respondent in a marriage-like relationship, so as to give rise to a potential entitlement to spousal support under the Family Law Act, S.B.C. 2011, c. 25 (“FLA”).
[2] The facts alleged by the claimant do not fit within a traditional concept of marriage. The claimant does not allege that she and the respondent ever lived together. Indeed, she has only met the respondent in person four times: twice very briefly in a public setting; a third time in private, when she alleges the respondent sexually assaulted her; and a fourth and final occasion, when she informed the respondent she was pregnant with his child.
[3] The claimant’s case is that what began as a non-consensual sexual encounter evolved into a loving and affectionate relationship. That relationship occurred almost entirely over private text messages. The parties rarely spoke on the telephone, and never saw one another during the relationship, even over video. The claimant says they could not be together because the respondent is forbidden by his station and religious beliefs from intimate relationships or marriage. Nonetheless, she alleges, they formed a marriage-like relationship that lasted from January 2018 to January 2019.
[4] The respondent denies any romantic relationship with the claimant. While he acknowledges providing emotional and financial support to the claimant, he says it was for the benefit of the child the claimant told him was his daughter.
[5] The claimant’s proposed amendment raises a novel question: can a secret relationship that began on-line and never moved into the physical world be like a marriage? In my view, that question should be answered by a trial judge after hearing all of the evidence. The alleged facts give rise to a reasonable claim the claimant lived with the respondent in a marriage-like relationship. Accordingly, I grant the claimant leave to amend her notice of family claim.
BACKGROUND
[6] It should be emphasized that this is an application to amend pleadings only. The allegations by the claimant are presumed to be true for the purposes of this application. Those allegations have not been tested in a court of law.
[7] The respondent, Ogyen Trinley Dorje, is a high lama of the Karma Kagyu School of Tibetan Buddhism. He has been recognized and enthroned as His Holiness, the 17th Gyalwang Karmapa. Without meaning any disrespect, I will refer to him as Mr. Dorje in these reasons for judgment.
[8] Mr. Dorje leads a monastic and nomadic lifestyle. His true home is Tibet, but he currently resides in India. He receives followers from around the world at the Gyuto Monetary in India. He also travels the world teaching Tibetan Buddhist Dharma and hosting pujas, ceremonies at which Buddhists express their gratitude and devotion to the Buddha.
[9] The claimant, Vikki Hui Xin Han, is a former nun of Tibetan Buddhism. Ms. Han first encountered Mr. Dorje briefly at a large puja in 2014. The experience of the puja convinced Ms. Han she wanted to become a Buddhist nun. She met briefly with Mr. Dorje, in accordance with Kagyu traditions, to obtain his approval to become a nun.
[10] In October 2016, Ms. Han began a three-year, three-month meditation retreat at a monastery in New York State. Her objective was to learn the practices and teachings of the Kagyu Lineage. Mr. Dorje was present at the retreat twice during the time Ms. Han was at the monastery.
[11] Ms. Han alleges that on October 14, 2017, Mr. Dorje sexually assaulted her in her room at the monastery. She alleges that she became pregnant from the assault.
[12] After she learned that she was pregnant, Ms. Han requested a private audience with Mr. Dorje. In November 2017, in the presence of his bodyguards, Ms. Han informed Mr. Dorje she was pregnant with his child. Mr. Dorje initially denied responsibility; however, he provided Ms. Han with his email address and a cellphone number, and, according to Ms. Han, said he would “prepare some money” for her.
[13] Ms. Han abandoned her plan to become a nun, left the retreat and returned to Canada. She never saw Mr. Dorje again.
[14] After Ms. Han returned to Canada, she and Mr. Dorje began a regular communication over an instant messaging app called Line. They also exchanged emails and occasionally spoke on the telephone.
[15] The parties appear to have expressed care and affection for one another in these communications. I say “appear to” because it is difficult to fully understand the meaning and intentions of another person from brief text messages, especially those originally written in a different language. The parties wrote in a private shorthand, sharing jokes, emojis, cartoon portraits and “hugs” or “kisses”. Ms. Han was the more expressive of the two, writing more frequently and in longer messages. Mr. Dorje generally participated in response to questions or prompting from Ms. Han, sometimes in single word messages.
[16] Ms. Han deposes that she believed Mr. Dorje was in love with her and that, by January 2018, she and Mr. Dorje were living in a “conjugal relationship”.
[17] During their communications, Ms. Han expressed concern that her child would be “illegitimate”. She appears to have asked Mr. Dorje to marry her, and he appears to have responded that he was “not ready”.
[18] Throughout 2018, Mr. Dorje transferred funds in various denominations to Ms. Han through various third parties. Ms. Han deposes that these funds were:
a) $50,000 CDN to deliver the child and for postpartum care she was to receive at a facility in Seattle;
b) $300,000 CDN for the first year of the child’s life;
c) $20,000 USD for a wedding ring, because Ms. Han wrote “Even if we cannot get married, you must buy me a wedding ring”;
d) $400,000 USD to purchase a home for the mother and child.
[19] On June 19, 2018, Ms. Han gave birth to a daughter in Richmond, B.C.
[20] On September 17, 2018, Mr. Dorje wrote, ”Taking care of her and you are my duty for life”.
[21] Ms. Han’s expectation was that the parties would live together in the future. She says they planned to live together. Those plans evolved over time. Initially they involved purchasing a property in Toronto, so that Mr. Dorje could visit when he was in New York. They also discussed purchasing property in Calgary or renting a home in Vancouver for that purpose. Ms. Han eventually purchased a condominium in Richmond using funds provided by Mr. Dorje.
[22] Ms. Han deposes that the parties made plans for Mr. Dorje to visit her and meet the child in Richmond. In October 2018, however, Mr. Dorje wrote that he needed to “disappear” to Europe. He wrote:
I will definitely find a way to meet her
And you
Remember to take care of yourself if something happens
[23] The final plan the parties discussed, according to Ms. Han, was that Mr. Dorje would sponsor Ms. Han and the child to immigrate to the United States and live at the Kagyu retreat centre in New York State.
[24] In January 2019, Ms. Han lost contact with Mr. Dorje.
[25] Ms. Han commenced this family law case on July 17, 2019, seeking child support, a declaration of parentage and a parentage test. She did not seek spousal support.
[26] Ms. Han first proposed a claim for spousal support in October 2020 after a change in her counsel. Following an exchange of correspondence concerning an application for leave to amend the notice of family claim, Ms. Han’s counsel wrote that Ms. Han would not be advancing a spousal support claim. On March 16, 2020, counsel reversed course, and advised that Ms. Han had instructed him to proceed with the application.
[27] When this application came on before me, the trial was set to commence on June 7, 2021. The parties were still in the process of discoveries and obtaining translations for hundreds of pages of documents in Chinese characters.
[28] At a trial management conference on May 6, 2021, noting the parties were not ready to proceed, Madam Justice Walkem adjourned the trial to April 11, 2022.
ANALYSIS
A. The Spousal Support Claim in this Case
[29] To claim spousal support in this case, Ms. Han must plead that she lived with Mr. Dorje in a marriage-like relationship. This is because only “spouses” are entitled to spousal support, and s. 3 of the Family Law Act defines a spouse as a person who is married or has lived with another person in a marriage-like relationship:
3 (1) A person is a spouse for the purposes of this Act if the person
(a) is married to another person, or
(b) has lived with another person in a marriage-like relationship, and
(i) has done so for a continuous period of at least 2 years, or
(ii) except in Parts 5 [Property Division] and 6 [Pension Division], has a child with the other person.
[30] Because she alleges she has a child with Mr. Dorje, Ms. Han need not allege that the relationship endured for a continuous period of two years to claim spousal support; but she must allege that she lived in a marriage-like relationship with him at some point in time. Accordingly, she must amend the notice of family claim.
B. The Test to Amend Pleadings
[31] Given that the notice of trial has been served, Ms. Han requires leave of the court to amend the notice of family claim: Supreme Court Family Rule 8-1(1)(b)(i).
[32] A person seeking to amend a notice of family claim must show that there is a reasonable cause of action. This is a low threshold. What the applicant needs to establish is that, if the facts pleaded are proven at trial, they would support a reasonable claim. The applicant’s allegations of fact are assumed to be true for the purposes of this analysis. Cantelon v. Wall, 2015 BCSC 813, at para. 7-8.
[33] The applicant’s delay, the reasons for the delay, and the prejudice to the responding party are also relevant factors. The ultimate consideration is whether it would be just and convenient to allow the amendment. Cantelon, at para. 6, citing Teal Cedar Products Ltd. v. Dale Intermediaries Ltd. et al (1986), 19 B.C.L.R. (3d) 282.
C. Pleadings in Family Law Cases
[34] Supreme Court Family Rules 3-1(1) and 4-1(1) require that a claim to spousal support be pleaded in a notice of family claim in Form F3. Section 2 of Form F3, “Spousal relationship history”, requires a spousal support claimant to check the boxes that apply to them, according to whether they are or have been married or are or have been in a marriage-like relationship. Where a claimant alleges a marriage-like relationship, Form F3 requires that they provide the date on which they began to live together with the respondent in a marriage-like relationship and, where applicable, the date on which they separated. Form F3 does not require a statement of the factual basis for the claim of spousal support.
[35] In this case, Ms. Han seeks to amend the notice of family claim to allege that she and Mr. Dorje began to live in a marriage-like relationship in or around January 2018, and separated in or around January 2019.
[36] An allegation that a person lived with a claimant in a marriage-like relationship is a conclusion of law, not an allegation of fact. Unlike the rules governing pleadings in civil actions, however, the Supreme Court Family Rules do not expressly require family law claimants to plead the material facts in support of conclusions of law.
[37] In other words, there is no express requirement in the Supreme Court Family Rules that Ms. Han plead the facts on which she relies for the allegation she and Mr. Dorje lived in a marriage-like relationship.
[38] Rule 4-6 authorizes a party to demand particulars, and then apply to the court for an order for further and better particulars, of a matter stated in a pleading. However, unless and until she is granted leave and files the proposed amended notice of family claim, Ms. Han’s allegation of a marriage-like relationship is not a matter stated in a pleading.
[39] Ms. Han filed an affidavit in support of her application to amend the notice of family claim. Normally, evidence would not be required or admissible on an application to amend a pleading. However, in the unusual circumstances of this case, the parties agreed I may look to Ms. Han’s affidavit and exhibits for the facts she pleads in support of the allegation of a marriage-like relationship.
[40] Because this is an application to amend - and Ms. Han’s allegations of fact are presumed to be true - I have not considered Mr. Dorje’s responding affidavit.
[41] Relying on affidavit evidence for an application to amend pleadings is less than ideal. It tends to merge and confuse the material facts with the evidence that would be relied on to prove those facts. In a number of places in her affidavit, for example, Ms. Han describes her feelings, impressions and understandings. A person’s hopes and intentions are not normally material facts unless they are mutual or reasonably held. The facts on which Ms. Han alleges she and Mr. Dorje formed a marriage-like relationship are more important for the present purposes than her belief they entered into a conjugal union.
[42] Somewhat unusually, in this case, almost all of the parties’ relevant communications were in writing. This makes it somewhat easier to separate the facts from the evidence; however, as stated above, it is difficult to understand the intentions and actions of a person from brief text messages.
[43] In my view, it would be a good practice for applicants who seek to amend their pleadings in family law cases to provide opposing counsel and the court with a schedule of the material facts on which they rely for the proposed amendment.
D. The Legal Concept of a Marriage-Like Relationship
[44] As Mr. Justice Myers observed in Mother 1 v. Solus Trust Company, 2019 BCSC 200, the concept of a marriage-like relationship is elastic and difficult to define. This elasticity is illustrated by the following passage from Yakiwchuk v. Oaks, 2003 SKQB 124, quoted by Myers J. at para. 133 of Mother 1:
[10] Spousal relationships are many and varied. Individuals in spousal relationships, whether they are married or not, structure their relationships differently. In some relationships there is a complete blending of finances and property - in others, spouses keep their property and finances totally separate and in still others one spouse may totally control those aspects of the relationship with the other spouse having little or no knowledge or input. For some couples, sexual relations are very important - for others, that aspect may take a back seat to companionship. Some spouses do not share the same bed. There may be a variety of reasons for this such as health or personal choice. Some people are affectionate and demonstrative. They show their feelings for their “spouse” by holding hands, touching and kissing in public. Other individuals are not demonstrative and do not engage in public displays of affection. Some “spouses” do everything together - others do nothing together. Some “spouses” vacation together and some spend their holidays apart. Some “spouses” have children - others do not. It is this variation in the way human beings structure their relationships that make the determination of when a “spousal relationship” exists difficult to determine. With married couples, the relationship is easy to establish. The marriage ceremony is a public declaration of their commitment and intent. Relationships outside marriage are much more difficult to ascertain. Rarely is there any type of “public” declaration of intent. Often people begin cohabiting with little forethought or planning. Their motivation is often nothing more than wanting to “be together”. Some individuals have chosen to enter relationships outside marriage because they did not want the legal obligations imposed by that status. Some individuals have simply given no thought as to how their relationship would operate. Often the date when the cohabitation actually began is blurred because people “ease into” situations, spending more and more time together. Agreements between people verifying when their relationship began and how it will operate often do not exist.
[45] In Mother 1, Mr. Justice Myers referred to a list of 22 factors grouped into seven categories, from Maldowich v. Penttinen, (1980), 17 R.F.L. (2d) 376 (Ont. Dist. Ct.), that have frequently been cited in this and other courts for the purpose of determining whether a relationship was marriage-like, at para. 134 of Mother 1:
1. Shelter:
(a) Did the parties live under the same roof?
(b) What were the sleeping arrangements?
(c) Did anyone else occupy or share the available accommodation?
2. Sexual and Personal Behaviour:
(a) Did the parties have sexual relations? If not, why not?
(b) Did they maintain an attitude of fidelity to each other?
(c) What were their feelings toward each other?
(d) Did they communicate on a personal level?
(e) Did they eat their meals together?
(f) What, if anything, did they do to assist each other with problems or during illness?
(g) Did they buy gifts for each other on special occasions?
3. Services:
What was the conduct and habit of the parties in relation to:
(a) preparation of meals;
(b) washing and mending clothes;
(c) shopping;
(d) household maintenance; and
(e) any other domestic services?
4. Social:
(a) Did they participate together or separately in neighbourhood and community activities?
(b) What was the relationship and conduct of each of them toward members of their respective families and how did such families behave towards the parties?
5. Societal:
What was the attitude and conduct of the community toward each of them and as a couple?
6. Support (economic):
(a) What were the financial arrangements between the parties regarding the provision of or contribution toward the necessaries of life (food, clothing, shelter, recreation, etc.)?
(b) What were the arrangements concerning the acquisition and ownership of property?
(c) Was there any special financial arrangement between them which both agreed would be determinant of their overall relationship?
7. Children:
What was the attitude and conduct of the parties concerning children?
[46] In Austin v. Goerz, 2007 BCCA 586, the Court of Appeal cautioned against a “checklist approach”; rather, a court should "holistically" examine all the relevant factors. Cases like Molodowich provide helpful indicators of the sorts of behaviour that society associates with a marital relationship, the Court of Appeal said; however, “the presence or absence of any particular factor cannot be determinative of whether a relationship is marriage-like” (para. 58).
[47] In Weber v. Leclerc, 2015 BCCA 492, the Court of Appeal again affirmed that there is no checklist of characteristics that will be found in all marriages and then concluded with respect to evidence of intentions:
[23] The parties’ intentions – particularly the expectation that the relationship will be of lengthy, indeterminate duration – may be of importance in determining whether a relationship is “marriage-like”. While the court will consider the evidence expressly describing the parties’ intentions during the relationship, it will also test that evidence by considering whether the objective evidence is consonant with those intentions.
[24] The question of whether a relationship is “marriage-like” will also typically depend on more than just their intentions. Objective evidence of the parties’ lifestyle and interactions will also provide direct guidance on the question of whether the relationship was “marriage-like”.
[48] Significantly for this case, the courts have looked to mutual intent in order to find a marriage-like relationship. See, for example, L.E. v. D.J., 2011 BCSC 671 and Buell v. Unger, 2011 BCSC 35; Davey Estate v. Gruyaert, 2005 CarswellBC 3456 at 13 and 35.
[49] In Mother 1, Myers J. concluded his analysis of the law with the following learned comment:
[143] Having canvassed the law relating to the nature of a marriage-like relationship, I will digress to point out the problematic nature of the concept. It may be apparent from the above that determining whether a marriage-like relationship exists sometimes seems like sand running through one's fingers. Simply put, a marriage-like relationship is akin to a marriage without the formality of a marriage. But as the cases mentioned above have noted, people treat their marriages differently and have different conceptions of what marriage entails.
[50] In short, the determination of whether the parties in this case lived in a marriage-like relationship is a fact-specific inquiry that a trial judge would need to make on a “holistic” basis, having regard to all of the evidence. While the trial judge may consider the various factors listed in the authorities, those factors would not be treated as a checklist and no single factor or category of factors would be treated as being decisive.
E. Is There a Reasonable Claim of a Marriage-Like Relationship?
[51] In this case, many of the Molodowich factors are missing:
a) The parties never lived under the same roof. They never slept together. They were never in the same place at the same time during the relationship. The last time they saw each other in person was in November 2017, before the relationship began.
b) The parties never had consensual sex. They did not hug, kiss or hold hands. With the exception of the alleged sexual assault, they never touched one another physically.
c) The parties expressed care and affection for one another, but they rarely shared personal information or interest in their lives outside of their direct topic of communication. They did not write about their families, their friends, their religious beliefs or their work.
d) They expressed concern and support for one another when the other felt unwell or experienced health issues, but they did not provide any care or assistance during illness or other problems.
e) They did not assist one another with domestic chores.
f) They did not share their relationship with their peers or their community. There is no allegation, for example, that Mr. Dorje told his fellow monks or any of his followers about the relationship. There is no allegation that Ms. Han told her friends or any co-workers. Indeed, there is no allegation that anyone, with the exception of Ms. Han’s mother, knew about the relationship. Although Mr. Dorje gave Ms. Han’s mother a gift, he never met the mother and he never spoke to her.
g) They did not intend to have a child together. The child was conceived as a result of a sexual assault. While Mr. Dorje expressed interest in “meeting” the child, he never followed up. He currently has no relationship with the child. There is no allegation he has sought access or parenting arrangements.
[52] The only Molodowich factor of any real relevance in this case is economic support. Mr. Dorje provided the funds with which Ms. Han purchased a condominium. Mr. Dorje initially wrote that he wanted to buy a property with the money, but, he wrote, “It’s the same thing if you buy [it]”.
[53] Mr. Dorje also provided a significant amount of money for Ms. Han’s postpartum care and the child’s first year of life.
[54] This financial support may have been primarily for the benefit of the child. Even the condominium, Ms. Han wrote, was primarily for the benefit of the child.
[55] However, in my view, a trial judge may attach a broader significance to the financial support from Mr. Dorje than child support alone. A trial judge may find that the money Mr. Dorje provided to Ms. Han at her request was an expression of his commitment to her in circumstances in which he could not commit physically. The money and the gifts may be seen by the trial judge to have been a form of down payment by Mr. Dorje on a promise of continued emotional and financial support for Ms. Han, or, in Mr. Dorje’s own words, “Taking care of her and you are my duty for life” (emphasis added).
[56] On the other hand, I find it difficult to attach any particular significance to the fact that Mr. Dorje agreed to provide funds for Ms. Han to purchase a wedding ring. It appears to me that Ms. Han demanded that Mr. Dorje buy her a wedding ring, not that the ring had any mutual meaning to the parties as a marriage symbol. But it is relevant, in my view, that Mr. Dorje provided $20,000 USD to Ms. Han for something she wanted that was of no benefit to the child.
[57] Further, Ms. Han alleges that the parties intended to live together. At a minimum, a trial judge may find that the discussions about where Ms. Han and the child would live reflected a mutual intention of the parties to see one another and spend time together when they could.
[58] Mr. Dorje argues that an intention to live together at some point in the future is not sufficient to show that an existing relationship was marriage-like. He argues that the question of whether the relationship was marriage-like requires more than just intentions, citing Weber, supra.
[59] In my view, the documentary evidence referred to above provides some objective evidence in this case that the parties progressed beyond mere intentions. As stated, the parties appear to have expressed genuine care and affection for one another. They appear to have discussed marriage, trust, honesty, finances, mutual obligations and acquiring family property. These are not matters one would expect Mr. Dorje to discuss with a friend or a follower, or even with the mother of his child, without a marriage-like element of the relationship.
[60] A trial judge may find on the facts alleged by Ms. Han that the parties loved one another and would have lived together, but were unable to do so because of Mr. Dorje’s religious duties and nomadic lifestyle.
[61] The question I raised in the introduction to these reasons is whether a relationship that began on-line and never moved into the physical world can be marriage-like.
[62] Notably, the definition of a spouse in the Family Law Act does not require that the parties live together, only that they live with another person in a marriage-like relationship.
[63] In Connor Estate, 2017 BCSC 978, Mr. Justice Kent found that a couple that maintained two entirely separate households and never lived under the same roof formed a marriage-like relationship. (Connor Estate was decided under the intestacy provisions of the Wills, Estates and Succession Act, S.B.C. 2009, c. 13 ("WESA"), but courts have relied on cases decided under WESA and the FLA interchangeably for their definitions of a spouse.) Mr. Justice Kent found:
[50] The evidence is overwhelming and I find as a fact that Mr. Chambers and Ms. Connor loved and cared deeply about each other, and that they had a loving and intimate relationship for over 20 years that was far more than mere friendship or even so-called "friendship with benefits". I accept Mr. Chambers' evidence that he would have liked to share a home with Ms. Connor after the separation from his wife, but was unable to do so because of Ms. Connor's hoarding illness. The evidence amply supports, and I find as a fact, that Mr. Chambers and Ms. Connor loved each other, were faithful to each other, communicated with each other almost every day when they were not together, considered themselves to be (and presented themselves to be) "husband and wife" and were accepted by all who knew them as a couple.
[64] Connor Estate may be distinguishable from this case because Mr. Chambers and Ms. Connor were physically intimate for over 20 years, and presented themselves to the world as a married couple.
[65] Other decisions in which a marriage-like relationship has been found to exist despite the parties not living together have involved circumstances in which the couple lived under the same roof at previous points in the relationship, and the issue was whether they continued to be spouses after they took up separate residences: in Thompson v. Floyd, 2001 BCCA 78, the parties had lived together for a period of at least 11 years; in Roach v. Dutra, 2010 BCCA 264, the parties had lived together for approximately three years.
[66] However, as Mr. Justice Kent noted in Connor Estate:
[48] … [W]hile much guidance might be found in this case law, the simple fact is that no two cases are identical (and indeed they usually vary widely) and it is the assessment of evidence as a whole in this particular case which matters.
[67] Mr. Justice Kent concluded:
[53] Like human beings themselves, marriage-like relationships can come in many and various shapes. In this particular case, I have no doubt that such a relationship existed …
[68] As stated, Ms. Han’s claim is novel. It may even be weak. Almost all of the traditional factors are missing. The fact that Ms. Han and Mr. Dorje never lived under the same roof, never shared a bed and never even spent time together in person will militate against a finding they lived with one another in a marriage-like relationship. However, the traditional factors are not a mandatory check-list that confines the “elastic” concept of a marriage-like relationship. And if the COVID pandemic has taught us nothing else, it is that real relationships can form, blossom and end in virtual worlds.
[69] In my view, the merits of Ms. Han’s claim should be decided on the evidence. Subject to an overriding prejudice to Mr. Dorje, she should have leave to amend the notice of family claim. However, she should also provide meaningful particulars of the alleged marriage-like relationship.
F. Delay / Prejudice
[70] Ms. Han filed her notice of family claim on July 17, 2019. She brought this application to amend approximately one year and nine months after she filed the pleading, just over two months before the original trial date.
[71] Ms. Han’s delay was made all that more remarkable by her change in position from January 19, 2021, when she confirmed, through counsel, that she was not seeking spousal support in this case.
[72] Ms. Han gave notice of her intention to proceed with this application to Mr. Dorje on March 16, 2021. By the time the application was heard, the parties had conducted examinations for discovery without covering the issues that would arise from a claim of spousal support.
[73] Also, in April, Ms. Han produced additional documents, primarily text messages, that may be relevant to her claim of spousal support, but were undecipherable to counsel for Mr. Dorje, who does not read Mandarin.
[74] This application proceeded largely on documents selected and translated by counsel for Ms. Han. I was informed that Mandarin translations of the full materials would take 150 days.
[75] Understandably in the circumstances, Mr. Dorje argued that an amendment two months before trial would be neither just nor convenient. He argued that he would be prejudiced by an adjournment so as to allow Ms. Han to advance a late claim of spousal support.
[76] The circumstances changed on May 6, 2021, when Madam Justice Walkem adjourned the trial to July 2022 and reset it for 25 days. Madam Justice Walkem noted that most of the witnesses live internationally and require translators. She also noted that paternity may be in issue, and Mr. Dorje may amend his pleadings to raise that issue. It seems clear that, altogether apart from the potential spousal support claim, the parties were not ready to proceed to trial on June 7, 2021.
[77] In my view, any remaining prejudice to Mr. Dorje is outweighed by the importance of having all of the issues between the parties decided on their merits.
[78] Ms. Han’s delay and changes of position on spousal support may be a matter to de addressed in a future order of costs; but they are not grounds on which to deny her leave to amend the notice of family claim.
CONCLUSION
[79] Ms. Han is granted leave to amend her notice of family claim in the form attached as Appendix A to the notice of application to include a claim for spousal support.
[80] Within 21 days, or such other deadline as the parties may agree, Ms. Han must provide particulars of the marriage-like relationship alleged in the amended notice of family claim.
[81] Ms. Han is entitled to costs of this application in the cause of the spousal support claim.
“Master Elwood”
同時也有20部Youtube影片,追蹤數超過361萬的網紅Dan Lok,也在其Youtube影片中提到,How To Manage Your Money As An Entrepreneur? This Is Only One Of Many Profound Questions Dan Lok Answered At The Last SMART Challenge. Take Your Chanc...
「canada real estate」的推薦目錄:
- 關於canada real estate 在 江魔的魔界(Kong Keen Yung 江健勇) Facebook 的最讚貼文
- 關於canada real estate 在 Scholarship for Vietnamese students Facebook 的最佳解答
- 關於canada real estate 在 Microsoft Azure Facebook 的最佳貼文
- 關於canada real estate 在 Dan Lok Youtube 的最佳貼文
- 關於canada real estate 在 Steve's POV Steve's Point of View スティーブ的視点 Youtube 的精選貼文
- 關於canada real estate 在 Nikmatul Rosidah Youtube 的最佳解答
- 關於canada real estate 在 Canadian Real Estate, Inflation, Heat Back Up - YouTube 的評價
canada real estate 在 Scholarship for Vietnamese students Facebook 的最佳解答
MỘT SỐ BẬC DU HỌC PHỔ BIẾN DỄ CÓ PR Ở CANADA 🇨🇦
Bạn nào mê đất nước Canada hiền hoà, nhiều cơ hội định cư nào? Bài viết cực chi tiết từ bạn Phil từ group Scholarship Hunters. Phải lưu và share mạnh sau này dùng dần thôi ^^
Canada là nước multicultural có tư tưởng thoáng ít bị những định kiến xã hội kiểu phải có bằng đại học hay phải học thạc sĩ cho bằng hàng xóm…cho nên dù học bậc hàm cao hay thấp, làm nghề văn phòng hay tay chân cũng không ai quan tâm đánh giá cá nhân. Vậy để tập trung vào mục tiêu lấy PR định cư cho cả gia đình và có công việc ổn định tương lai ở một đất nước mới, các bạn chỉ cần cân bằng trong việc chọn nghành học dựa vào 3 yếu tố : sở thích-khả năng-cơ hội nghề nghiệp để định cư, và chọn bậc học tùy thuộc vào tài chính và sức học của bạn, là bạn có thể đạt được kết quả tối ưu nhất 😉
- Học Master và các bậc cao hơn : tùy vào sức học và khả năng tài chính của bản thân mà các bạn chọn hướng này. Benefits là học xong có nhiều chương trình cho apply PR processing khoảng 18 tháng của tỉnh bang mà không cần job offer. Bù lại Drawbacks là chi phí ban đầu học rất cao $50,000~60,000/2 năm học, yêu cầu đầu vào cao IELTS 7.0 và học cũng khó, ra trường hơi khó kiếm việc với tấm bằng Master nếu chưa có kinh nghiệm làm việc và/hoặc bị overqualified. Ai hợp hướng nghiên cứu làm phòng lab và ngắm số liệu thì hẵng theo, tính đường dài khi thăng tiến thì mới cần Master. Các bạn làm giỏi và công ty tốt thì họ sẽ cho cả tiền học để bạn học lên Master và làm tiếp cho họ 2~3 năm tùy thỏa thuận. Nếu không muốn phụ thuộc thì khi có PR bạn có thể mượn tiền hỗ trợ từ tỉnh bang để đi học rồi trả góp từ từ 😊
- Học University 4 năm và College 3 năm : ngoại trừ cái lợi có học kỳ Internships hay co-ops giúp bạn thực tập và tạo Networking ra thì mình thấy khá nhiều bất lợi cho phần đông các bạn ở Vietnam xin đi học : chi phí cao, thời gian học dài nên dễ rớt visa, bạn nào mà trên 30 tuổi mới chọn hướng đi du học như mình để lấy PR thì không nên đi hướng này, câu chuyện bằng Đại học hay Cao đẳng ở Canada nó khác vì 2 hướng đào tạo này đều tốt cả, có điều bạn phải chọn cái phù hợp với bản thân chứ không phải do những định kiến xã hội.
- Học Post Grad 1 năm : nếu chỉ học cái này thì work permit chỉ được cấp 1 năm bạn sẽ khó có job lấy 1 year Canadian Experience và ít cơ hội nộp định cư cũng như không đủ time đi làm gỡ vốn học phí đã bỏ ra 😉 Ngoài ra, mình cho rằng việc học luôn chương trình Post Grad này là lựa chọn không hay vì : Certificate 1 year khó đi xin việc như Diploma 2 year của College dù cho bạn học 2 chương trình Post Grad để lấy Work Permit 3 năm đi chăng nữa. Mấy bạn ở VN thì vẫn còn nặng cái danh xưng Đại học-Cao đẳng với Sau Đại học hay Cao học gì lắm ahihi Post Grad chỉ là Certificate chứ chả phải Sau Đại học gì ráo, theo tiêu chuẩn của Canada thì thấp hơn nhiều so với Diploma. Hình dung giống như bạn học Khóa chứng chỉ kế toán 8 tháng của một trung tâm nào đấy mở ra so với học Cao đẳng Tài chính kế toán 2 năm vậy. Những trường hợp mình biết mà chọn học Post Grad 1 năm rồi apply có PR Canada luôn thì phần nhiều profile đều là : trẻ dưới 30 tuổi độc thân, IELTS 7~8.0, có bằng cấp từ Úc hoặc Anh hoặc Mỹ, đã có 3 năm làm việc quốc tế. Bạn nào English level thấp và chỉ có bằng Đại học ở Việt Nam hoặc/và đã có gia đình và trên 30 tuổi thì khó có thể cạnh tranh với những profile như vầy trong Express Entry Pool lấy PR ở Canada
- College 2 năm : năm 2016 mình đã chọn học bậc này ra trường lấy work permit và job offer rồi làm đủ 1 năm kinh nghiệm Canada là nộp lấy PR cho cả nhà, vì chi phí đầu tư thấp, $30,000/2 năm học phí, nhu cầu lao động của employers với nhóm này cực kỳ cao đặc biệt là nhóm ngành STEM, liên bang và tỉnh bang cũng có nhiều chương trình ưu ái cho nhóm ngành này hơn là các ngành Arts & Business, nếu bạn chịu khó tập trung xây dựng bản thân trong quá trình học thì hầu như ai tốt nghiệp ra đều có việc ngay. Trung bình một nhà máy thuê 1 ông kỹ sư tốt nghiệp University thì phải thuê tới 5 ông College, các chương trình định cư của Canada cũng cần lao động nhóm làm tay nghề nhiều trong các lĩnh vực xây dựng, sửa chữa xe, điện tử viễn thông..v..v..và đầu bếp 😃 Có một điều quan trọng các bạn nên biết khi tìm hiểu về cuộc sống Canada là chính phủ họ rất xiết trong các ngành liên quan đến Giáo dục-Y tế và sức khỏe-Luật và bất động sản, nên nếu muốn học và làm các nghề này để định cư, e là sẽ hơi khó và vất vả cho bạn trong quá trình học thi License cũng như một số điều luật chỉ cho người có PR & Citizenship mới có thể làm được như Real Estate Agent chẳng hạn 😊
Chọn chương trình học phù hợp rồi thì bạn hãy chọn tiếp ngành học thật chín chắn, đừng nghe người này nói người kia rủ mà phóng lao thì trừ phi nhà bạn có dư tiền, hoặc bạn còn trẻ có nhiều thời gian để trải nghiệm, còn lại mình thấy toàn kết quả ê chề. Trước tiên bạn phải thật sự biết được :
- Bạn muốn gì? Cần PR định cư cho cả gia đình hay sống theo lý tưởng.
- Tố chất con người bạn phù hợp với ngành nghề gì? Bỏ qua cái bạn thích đi, vì thích thì nhiều lắm nhưng khả năng có hạn. Như mình cũng thích học và làm IT vì lương cao lắm, nhưng trí nhớ, sự thông minh, và tư duy thuật toán có hạn nên cũng không thể chịu nổi áp lực và stress phải ngồi cả ngày lẫn đêm trên máy tính viết code lập trình này nọ.
- Khả năng của bạn có phù hợp với các công việc ở Canada không? Ví dụ như nhiều bạn thích làm kinh doanh hay Marketing mà tiếng Anh chưa tốt chẳng hạn, nói ai nghe để hiểu mà thuyết phục họ. Hoặc những ngành nghề quá đặc biệt liên quan đến năng khiếu tài năng như vẽ, nhảy, đàn hát, diễn viên và kịch nghệ nếu mục tiêu gia đình bạn là lấy PR thì cũng không nên học.
- Đặc biệt dành cho các bạn trên 30 tuổi và/hoặc đã có gia đình con cái : lựa chọn an toàn là học lại ngành/việc mà bản thân đã hiểu biết và làm qua. Việc bạn học ở Canada chỉ là nạp thêm Từ vựng chuyên ngành, các tiêu chuẩn và cách làm việc. Còn nguyên lý và các phần râu ria khác bạn hầu như đã biết qua hơn 80% rồi. Cái lợi là việc học của bạn sẽ nhàn hơn có nhiều thời gian đi làm part time để cover living cost, đạt kết quả tốt hơn, ra trường đi làm cũng dễ lấy Experience từ Việt Nam để reference hơn. Ví dụ như ông anh người quen mình học Điện tử ở Đh Bách Khoa, quyết định đi học lại vào năm 42 tuổi, nên chọn học lại Industrial Electrician ra trường có job ngay, giờ cũng đang Processing sắp có PR rồi. Ở Canada thích cái đi làm trong Resume không ghi Tuổi, Tình trạng hôn nhân, Hình thẻ để HR chỉ focus vào năng lực của bạn mà chọn ứng viên 😉
Khi có PR rồi mà bạn còn sức thích học lại cũng nhẹ gánh hơn vì học phí chỉ bằng 1/3 so với international students chưa kể được tỉnh bang hỗ trợ tiền học và cho vay học phí. Đường có đi mới đến, there's a will there's a way mà ha 😃
Tóm lại, xác định bạn cần gì và muốn gì phù hợp với gia đình và bản thân là điều tiên quyết vì đi di cư khi có con, dĩ nhiên nó không dễ dàng như các bạn trẻ <30 tuổi còn độc thân, nước nào cũng được miễn sao có benefits cho con cái và có các chương trình dễ định cư mà bản thân bạn đáp ứng được là tiến hành đi, vì cơ hội không đến nhiều lần. Bạn cần phải suy nghĩ sâu nhiều ngày trước khi dấn thân vào con đường định cư này : sẽ mất nhiều công sức và tốn kém, nhưng mình quả quyết với các bạn rằng thành quả có được sẽ giá trị không gì có thể so sánh được. Mỗi lần mình thất bại hay nản chí, mình hay nghĩ về những lợi ích mà gia đình và con cái mình sẽ đạt được, và cứ thế kiên trì tiếp tục, dần dần mọi việc đều ổn thỏa, những gì gia đình mình mưu cầu : thẻ PR cho cả gia đình và một ngôi nhà nhỏ ở Canada cho gia đình sống yên ổn sau 4 năm cày bừa, một công việc yêu thích, các con được học hành miễn phí và chơi đùa trong môi trường tốt. Vậy là quá đủ đầy mình không mong gì hơn 🥰
<3 Like page, tag và share bạn bè nhé <3
#HannahEd #sanhocbong #duhoc #scholarshipforVietnamesetudents #duhocCanada #hocbongCanada
canada real estate 在 Microsoft Azure Facebook 的最佳貼文
Looking for a house in Canada? Look in the cloud. The Canadian Real Estate Association hosts REALTOR.ca in Microsoft Azure to deliver faster site performance and introduce new features quicker. http://msft.social/pU9X0U
canada real estate 在 Dan Lok Youtube 的最佳貼文
How To Manage Your Money As An Entrepreneur? This Is Only One Of Many Profound Questions Dan Lok Answered At The Last SMART Challenge. Take Your Chance To Get Your Question Answered By Joining The Next SMART Challenge: https://moneymanagement.danlok.link
Managing money as an entrepreneur is completely different from managing money as an employee. Chances are, you are already good at making money. But how can you invest and keep the money? Watch the video all the way to the end to find out. Then, share this video with a fellow entrepreneur.
? SUBSCRIBE TO DAN'S YOUTUBE CHANNEL NOW ?
https://www.youtube.com/danlok?sub_confirmation=1
? Join my YouTube Membership to get access to EXCLUSIVE perks ?
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCs_6DXZROU29pLvgQdCx4Ww/join
Check out these Top Trending Playlists -
1.) Boss In The Bentley - https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLEmTTOfet46OWsrbWGPnPW8mvDtjge_6-
2.) Sales Tips That Get People To Buy - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E6Csz_hvXzw&list=PLEmTTOfet46PvAsPpWByNgUWZ5dLJd_I4
3.) Dan Lok’s Best Secrets - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FZNmFJUuTRs&list=PLEmTTOfet46N3NIYsBQ9wku8UBNhtT9QQ
Dan Lok has been viewed more than 1.7+ billion times across social media for his expertise on how to achieve financial confidence. And is the author of over a dozen international bestselling books.
Dan has also been featured on FOX Business News, MSNBC, CBC, FORBES, Inc, Entrepreneur, and Business Insider.
In addition to his social media presence, Dan Lok is the founder of the Dan Lok Organization, which includes more than two dozen companies - and is a venture capitalist currently evaluating acquisitions in markets such as education, new media, and software.
Some of his companies include Closers.com, Copywriters.com, High Ticket Closers, High Income Copywriters and a dozen of other brands.
And as chairman of DRAGON 100, the world’s most exclusive advisory board, Dan Lok also seeks to provide capital to minority founders and budding entrepreneurs.
Dan Lok trains as hard in the Dojo as he negotiates in the boardroom. And thus has earned himself the name; The Asian Dragon.
If you want the no b.s. way to master your financial destiny, then learn from Dan. Subscribe to his channel now.
★☆★ CONNECT WITH DAN ON SOCIAL MEDIA ★☆★
YouTube: http://youtube.danlok.link
Dan Lok Blog: http://blog.danlok.link
Dan Lok Shop: https://shop.danlok.link
Facebook: http://facebook.danlok.link
Instagram: http://instagram.danlok.link
Linkedin: http://mylinkedin.danlok.link
Podcast: http://thedanlokshow.danlok.link
#DanLok #MoneyManagement #Entrepreneur
Please understand that by watching Dan’s videos or enrolling in his programs does not mean you’ll get results close to what he’s been able to do (or do anything for that matter).
He’s been in business for over 20 years and his results are not typical.
Most people who watch his videos or enroll in his programs get the “how to” but never take action with the information. Dan is only sharing what has worked for him and his students.
Your results are dependent on many factors… including but not limited to your ability to work hard, commit yourself, and do whatever it takes.
Entering any business is going to involve a level of risk as well as massive commitment and action. If you're not willing to accept that, please DO NOT WATCH DAN’S VIDEOS OR SIGN UP FOR ONE OF HIS PROGRAMS.
This video is about How To Manage Your Money As An Entrepreneur.
https://youtu.be/W7u9ZqaawbU
https://youtu.be/W7u9ZqaawbU
![post-title](https://i.ytimg.com/vi/W7u9ZqaawbU/hqdefault.jpg)
canada real estate 在 Steve's POV Steve's Point of View スティーブ的視点 Youtube 的精選貼文
Steve’s POV - Thumbs Up Merchandise https://www.stevespov.com
All My JDM Ferrari Videos? https://bit.ly/3aictaD
Damon from Daily Driven Exotics ( DDE ) calls me out of the blue and asks if I want to go to Canada for a rally to help kids who have had it tough all their lives... I was in 100% but first I had a lot of prep to do to get my new Liberty Walk Ferrari ready for the trip... tires and airbags were 2 important things to do on top of the brake fluid I did the other day too!! Time is short with lots to do to get ready for this road trip with Damon, Dave, Alex Choi and me from LA to Canada!! Please subscribe and follow along for my POV "point of view" on this epic journey!
Big Brand Tire & Service - Simi Valley
983 E Easy St, Simi Valley, CA 93065
https://www.bigbrandtire.com
Diamond Auto Salon
5740 Corsa Ave Unit 103, Westlake Village, CA 91362
https://www.thediamondautosalon.com
@thediamondautosalon
Steve's POV / Thumbs Up Shop:
https://www.stevespov.com
Steve's POV Amazon Japan Store:
https://amzn.to/2J1lHyu
Edit: Media Focus, Inc.
https://www.media-focus.com
Top 5 Recent Videos:
Civic Type R vs Subaru STI
https://youtu.be/Mz1j4COM-Rg
I Bought a Liberty Walk WideBody 458!
https://youtu.be/b6ol8I5iEt0
$2 Part Fixed My Liberty Walk Ferrari 458!
https://youtu.be/pDuQ25p9P5g
My New Liberty Walk 458 First Public Reveal
https://youtu.be/DRftzsb9yeo
Liberty Walk Ferrari Down?!?
https://youtu.be/9fD6yUrq2ro
All videos presented in both Japan and English.
New Releases Every MONDAY & WEDNESDAY & FRIDAY 3PM PST
◆PLEASE SUBSCRIBE◆
http://www.youtube.com/user/steevie333?sub_confirmation=1
Please visit my sites:
Instagram: http://www.instagram.com/StevesPOV
Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/StevesPOV
Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/StevesPOV
Ebay Store: https://ebay.to/2JjAKTU
StevesPOV Web: http://www.StevesPOV.com
Amazon: https://www.amazon.com/shop/stevespov
Steve's POV Real Estate Instagram
http://www.instagram.com/carsncastles
Steve Feldman “Steve’s POV” Realtor (Keller Williams) website
https://stevefeldmanrealtor.com
Music from Epidemic Sound
http://www.epidemicsound.com
Steve's POV
スティーブ的視点
#StevesPOV #DDESteve #SupercarRoadTrip
![post-title](https://i.ytimg.com/vi/YW5JCW0H994/hqdefault.jpg)
canada real estate 在 Nikmatul Rosidah Youtube 的最佳解答
#canada#housing#edmonton.
Di Luar Negeri itu tiap Negara beda2 peraturan beli rumah.
contoh di HK Beli property bisa siapa saja asal Ada Duit Dan jadi hak milik
( Saya 2 x beli rumah di HK)
Jika Kita HK Permanent resident Stamp Duty nya lbh murah dibanding dgn non resident.
Belinya bisa dari Real estate atau langsung dari developer nya.( Tapi tetep pakai Property Agency juga)
Di Property Agency Kita juga bayar upah mereka karena ngurus A Sampai Z.
Jika apartment nya saat beli blm jadi Kita bisa milih2 lantai nya Mau kayu atau tile.
Dalam apartment Developer akan kadang
Semua appliances dapur mesin cuci, Microwave,kompor, kulkas,oven,Serta kabinet .
Kamar mandi juga Ada wastafel,bathub,lemari kamar mandi.
Jika lampu itu akan jadi urusan yg nempati.
Nah gimana Canada?
Canada juga sama Kita semua orang bisa beli asal Ada Duit Dan bayar GST.
Jika beli dari Property agenci ya rumahnya dah jadi lebih enak dari developer belinya.kita bisa milih tanah di area mana sesuai developer punya nya dimana.
Kita bisa milih warna sesuai contoh yg developer tunjukan di Bangunan Show home mereka.
Di Canada tiap di Buka Community akan dibangun jg sekolahan Dan tempat Belanja ,Bank Dan ll nya.
Jadi Beli rumah itu bukan lu main beli Aja Dan Bangunan harus sesuai community tersebut tidak bisa beda sendiri rumah bentuknya.
Masa bentuknya rumah Minang ,Dayak atau joglo ya gak boleh lah.
Beli rumah bisa dgn Mortgage atau Cash Tanpa nyicil ( jika punya Duit).
![post-title](https://i.ytimg.com/vi/zbKqVFrLcz4/hqdefault.jpg)
canada real estate 在 Canadian Real Estate, Inflation, Heat Back Up - YouTube 的推薦與評價
canadarealestate #canadainflation #bankofcanada Canada's real estate market, and its inflation rate, are heating back up – putting increased ... ... <看更多>