FAMILY LAW

[00:00:00] Speaker A: The best insight, instant feedback, accountability. The all new Talk Radio Freedom 106.5. [00:00:09] Speaker B: So we're talking family and law, domestic violence, children, how to get headphones for you. But I'll let you start a conversation while I run next door. But we're dealing with family law this morning. I like the maintenance factors as well, family court and stuff. And I don't really want to talk about divorce, but let's talk about the domestic part of things. A woman goes in the station, makes a report, said the man beat him up. You know, let's get into that aspect of it. [00:00:38] Speaker C: Yeah. So I thought it would have been fitting to start the conversation this week talking a bit about family law, a bit about domestic violence, custody and maintenance. As, as we know, the law term just started. I did attend the opening of the law term and heard the Chief Justice's speech. And his speech main centered around reducing some of the delays within the system, returning back in person for all courts, essentially particularly the magistrate courts. Some of the courts that still have work to be done would remain closed, well, virtually until that work is essentially completed. And he also mentioned ensuring that the court and justice is accessible to the ordinary person. Which is why I thought that it would be fitting to discuss family law, particularly custody, maintenance and domestic violence, as that's definitely a topic that most persons have concerns about and that they might need information about. [00:01:46] Speaker B: Okay, I kind of missed it. So you had to recap. [00:01:49] Speaker C: Yes, I was essentially just saying the Lawton recently reopened and in the Chief Justice's speech she discussed several things which included reducing delays within the system, returning in person for magistrate courts, and also ensuring that justice and the court system is accessible to the ordinary person. Which is why I thought it would be fitting to start the conversation on this particular topic because generally when persons hear that I am an attorney at law, they usually have questions that surround areas that touch and concern family law. [00:02:22] Speaker B: Well, we done get a question already. Hi, good morning, Davian. Andissa, I have a question as it pertains to family law. In a situation where an aunt has passed away who was never married or, or never had any children or a will, if she had two other siblings, does the inheritance go to the sib. Does the inheritance go to the siblings, considering that her parents are also dead? Also, if one of those sibling dies, does the inheritance go to their children? [00:02:53] Speaker C: Right. So in a situation like that, if the person that's actually governed by the Administration of Estates act, so if the person doesn't leave a will saying how they want their property to be, to be distributed then it will be governed by that act which has different categories of how it would pass the person. So the first, obviously who has the first priority would be the spouse, then the children, then siblings. So it essentially goes down to next of kin in instances where the person. [00:03:21] Speaker B: But if you have multiple siblings, you know you have three brothers. [00:03:24] Speaker C: Yeah, well we'll go to the three siblings, it will go to the next. [00:03:26] Speaker D: Equally. [00:03:27] Speaker C: Yeah, if a person had three children and it went to their children and it would just be distributed equally. [00:03:33] Speaker B: Oh it wouldn't be to the oldest, the second oldest or the oldest. [00:03:36] Speaker C: It would be equally amongst the. [00:03:38] Speaker B: Oh so okay, so it would be equally. [00:03:40] Speaker C: They would have to apply to administer the estate of the DC space and indicating that, you know, she never was [00:03:48] Speaker B: married, she has no children, her parents are dead. [00:03:51] Speaker C: Yeah, settled. And it's just what her estate would be. If she have money in the bank or house, a car, whatever the case may be, it's just us. And then they will get the. Just to say that it will pass to these persons so that they will be able to access it. Cuz obviously the bank isn't going to release any money to you unless you're able to say well I entitled it in some way. [00:04:09] Speaker B: So the bank just get people money. Cuz if that never happened, the money stays in the bank. [00:04:13] Speaker C: I guess so. [00:04:14] Speaker B: Right. [00:04:15] Speaker C: Because you're not supposed to access it if you. An the. If you do, if you didn't have that document. [00:04:20] Speaker B: So okay, so it goes to the siblings and the question was if one of the siblings died. Well, I guess if you, if, if it's three siblings or four. All right. And it's, it's distributed equally your portion. If you die, you and you have children, then your inheritance will go to them. Not the balance of the estate because it was equally distributed. Because that's the question that the texter is asking. And thank you for that question. So right. The inheritance go to the siblings, considering the parents are there. But if one of these, those siblings dies, does that inheritance? Well, yeah, I guess so. Right. [00:04:54] Speaker C: It would be the remaining siblings I believe. Unless if you could show that. Okay, this is, this also forms part of the person's estate. No, no. [00:05:02] Speaker B: Okay, so the person. What, what they're asking, I mean, I think is so the, the person dies. There are three cell phones and there are three siblings. So these two, three cell phones is the estate. And they say, okay, they file whatever you tell me and then they distribute the assets equally among the three. So everybody get a cell Phone. But then one of the siblings who received their portion dies. [00:05:23] Speaker C: But they have children, they already received their portions. Yes, but then that will form part of their state. [00:05:29] Speaker B: That's it. I think that's the question the person was asking. [00:05:32] Speaker C: Yeah. So like even in a situation. So for instance, we might deal with situations and this is actually not necessarily family law strictly. But for instance, if someone dies and the executor or somebody who would be a beneficiary of their estate then sees that something belongs to their estate that isn't properly there, they could then take action to get that within the asset and then for it to be distributed to the beneficiaries accordingly. So for instance, one, in one situation where we dealt with the persons, they owned husband and wife when, while they were married, they bought a property, owned it as joint tenants. Right. That usually mean if one of the persons die, the entire interest passes to the other person. But they got a divorce, they didn't pursue property settlement. But apparently there was this agreement where one party said that they essentially relinquishing their interest in the property for whatever reason. Right. They didn't act on that agreement, meaning they didn't fully transfer the title to the other person's name solely on the debt of the person because the person remarried on the debt of the person. His wife then is now taking action to say there's this agreement where the ex wife relinquish her interest in the property and this house belongs to his estate. So she's taking action to ensure that his estate would be able to recover that house. Obviously that would be up a big discussion when it actually gets to the court. But as some instances where, you know, even though it didn't, you know, to take action to ensure that everything that you say belongs to the person actually is accounted for in the estates to be distributed to their beneficiaries. But that isn't strictly family law. We're actually talking about custody maintenance and domestic violence, which is a bit different. [00:07:21] Speaker B: All right, so when it comes to custody, let me take this call. Good morning. [00:07:26] Speaker D: A pleasant good morning once more, Davy and Anisa. Pleasant good morning. You know, I like to hear your voice in the morning. I like you to hear my voice too on a Friday morning. So we'll have a good weekend. I just want to add to the conversation with regard to the question just now. Yeah, so someone dies, they have no children. [00:07:46] Speaker C: Right. [00:07:46] Speaker D: The siblings make a claim and so on. I'm not quite sure the voice note that was played or if that is what the person meant. But the thing is that one of the siblings died, but would have had an entitlement and would have left a will for her children. Her children probated the will or even letters of administration, and they got the grants. So I will ask you now to comment. I will not give an opinion. I will ask you now to comment on the situation where that sibling's children would have gotten the grant and as a result would have been entitled to her entitlement or his entitlement. Hasanke, enjoy. [00:08:33] Speaker C: Yeah, so essentially what we were trying to explain before, so the person dies, they have three siblings. All three siblings would be entitled to whatever that person's estate is, equally. So one third each, that one third belongs to that sibling. So if they then dies, the wanted will also pass to their estate because the wanted is essentially theirs, if that makes sense. And their children. [00:08:58] Speaker B: Yeah, I think we was clear with that. Yeah, Carney, you're trying to confuse the thing as a lawyer. All right, we was clear. We was clear with that. We was clear with that. So the sibling receives, once you receive your portion, that makes up your estate. So the balance of the estate the other siblings received, you got your portion, which would add into your personal estate your one third. [00:09:18] Speaker C: Yes. [00:09:18] Speaker B: And then whatever you had before. So if you pass away, then that falls in line with your next of kin. Yeah. Your children, if you have a will, your husband, whatever. [00:09:29] Speaker C: Why your estate to your beneficiaries. [00:09:31] Speaker B: To your beneficiaries. Not the balance of the other siblings that stayed. I don't do with them. All right, so next question. But before I get to that question, and thank you very much for bringing in those questions this morning. As we talk in family law custody, we want to talk about that as well. So here is today's Cyber Insight brought to you by 800 tech. One hidden weakness can interrupt operations. Finding it yourself is always less expensive than discovering it during an attack. Today's Cyber Insight brought to you by 800 Tech. Your tech tip. In a minute. [00:10:07] Speaker E: Every business leader asks the same question. Are we really secure? The truth is, you won't find the answer in assumptions. You'll find it in testing. Penetration testing safely simulates real world cyber attacks to uncover the weaknesses attackers are looking for before they find them. At 800 Tech, we help organizations replace uncertainty with confidence through independent security testing and actionable insight. Because confidence comes from testing, not guessing. Call 2 to 3, that's 223-8324 or visit www.800-tech.com to SC schedule a confidential consultation. [00:10:48] Speaker A: Now, this is 106.5. 106.5. The race for the Republic Bank CPL T20 title is heating up and you won't want to miss a moment of the action. [00:11:02] Speaker B: It's gone. [00:11:04] Speaker A: Catch every eliminator and the grand final live on CNC3 television and streaming at cnc3live.com follow CNC3 on social media for all match fixtures and the start times who will rise under the pressure and be crowned as CPL champions? The Republic Bank CPL T20 on CNC3 is sponsored by Republic Bank Coolmax, Carib, Lucozade Unit Trust Corporation, Jameson with it Avidan Properties Group Systems, SM, Jalil and Danko. [00:11:37] Speaker B: Cindy, what are you doing home so early? [00:11:39] Speaker F: I come to meet you first to go grocery shopping and to get the kids stuff for school. Boy, I hear my cousin coworkers talking about a grocery in Arima and one in Barataria who have the best prices. Come let me go right now. [00:11:51] Speaker B: Oh God, look at this place. I never see a grocery like this in this country. [00:11:57] Speaker F: Darling, look at parking like these people [00:11:59] Speaker C: on the whole street. [00:12:00] Speaker B: Look at these prices like everything reduced and you and see how helpful and friendly their staff is. [00:12:07] Speaker F: You see, we get everything and still have lots of money remaining to get the kids stuff for school and also to carry them somewhere good for the vacation. If you want to save money and make live better, shop at Mirage west side Supermarket in Arima or Jumbo Foods in Barataria where shopping is a pleasure. [00:12:26] Speaker G: CPR Productions presents the Best Little House in Guapo. [00:12:31] Speaker B: The sexy, saucy, stimulating comedies opening in Cipriani Labor College for two nights only [00:12:37] Speaker G: Saturday 3rd and Sunday 4th October 8:30 and 6:30pm housing Guapo City stars Cecilia, [00:12:44] Speaker B: Penny, Rhodey, Rachel, Sasha and Siobhan. [00:12:47] Speaker G: Mrs. Gaskin, it is not my problem that your husband want to come in here and resting his hair. No Mrs. Gaskin, put only go. Put only go. [00:12:54] Speaker B: Love his $ii drama, comedy suspense poor woman one house plenty bacchanal. Tickets available for this adult comedy app [00:13:02] Speaker G: Dolman Shoe store along circular mall, hike to TT home and more Valpark Plaza, All K Square stores and online adail. Any tickets? Box office opens the 1st of October. For info call 683-0356 or 683-4843 and follow CPR Productions on Facebook and Instagram. This is Carmen's house. The best little [00:13:26] Speaker A: Engage with Davey on the all new Talk Radio Freedom 106.5. [00:13:52] Speaker B: All right, good morning again Trinidad and Tobago. Hey, today is 911 you know, I forget to mention that earlier this morning. I tell you, I had a headache when I got into the studio this morning. You people bring love. And when Andesa shows up, it's more love again. All right, so today's 9 11. We had some 2977 person that would have passed away. And this was what, 25 years ago that we, we got up that morning and saw those planes crashing into the towers. I remember visiting ground zero in the US after, boy, the whole. Now if you go to New York now, I was there last year or year before, and you go to ground zero, they have this lovely building erected there. It's not a tall building, but they did something really monumental that, you know, it's a nice tourist, tourist attraction. You go in there underground, but it's really, really awesome. They really mark the territory well. Alright, Mr. Murray, the due process question from the silent listener. We are aware of families where after a family member passes away, confusion and dispute arise over the ownership of the house. Who is legally entitled to the property? I contributed more money toward the house, so I should get it. Someone appears claiming I was his or her daughter. The situation can create tension, division and lasting conflict among family members. The question what would you advise as a, as the proper due process for parents to follow before they pass away to ensure fairness, clarity and transparency for everyone involved? [00:15:24] Speaker C: Yeah, this is so two. Two big questions that are usually on the minds of Trinidadians are family law and how property should be passed on the debt of a family member. Because persons might be so, you know, cooperating and all of these different things while somebody is alive. And then when the person dies, that's when all the tension arises, which is why I always advocate for property proper estate planning. So before you die, create your will and we. I don't know why some persons are sometimes afraid to create a will, thinking that something bad might happen to them afterwards. But it is to avoid all the confusion that usually occurs afterwards where you properly set out, okay, these are my property, this belongs to me and I want it to pass to these persons accordingly. I don't want it to pass to this person because of xyz. And you could set that out in your will because, for instance, you may have. There might be instances where, you know, you're not. You're estranged from a particular family member, you're estranged from your daughter or son for whatever reason. If you die without a will, saying your exact wishes, then the Administration of Estates act will kick in and all of the children would be entitled equally to whatever Property that you have irregardless of who took care of mom or while mom was alive, or who took care of dad more while dad was alive, Everybody is equally entitled to it. If you create the will, then you could then say, well, because of the tumultuous relationship between me and X, I am only leaving $1 for this person so that it will be very clear that you don't necessarily want this particular property to pass to that person. So essentially, the long and short of that is that there should be proper estate planning. In particular, creating your will or creating your different arrangements to ensure that on your debt there isn't confusion in relation to how the estate would be distributed. And you could. You could appoint a third party who isn't, you know, somebody who is a beneficiary who would ensure that your wishes are carried out accordingly as the executor. And then you could lodge your will in probate registry or give it to someone to hold on to so that it doesn't become lost and only that we would be able to actually find it and say, well, okay, this is how the person wanted their estates to be distributed. [00:17:51] Speaker B: All right, I have a question from this texter here. [00:17:55] Speaker D: I don't think Arnie was trying to continue. [00:17:57] Speaker B: All right, I will get that back after Arima. Arima Banker would like you to sing Happy Birthday for his mom before you leave. Her name is Leela of Madras. Yeah, you want a female voice, but that before you leave. So before you wrap up justice, you. Yeah, they sing Happy Birthday for. For Arima Banka's mom, Leela. But first, Arima Banker, you had to confirm if mommy listening, you know, next, you know, we sing, you know, she put on the nice voice and give you the legal. What you sing the legal song. [00:18:23] Speaker C: Oh, Lord. [00:18:24] Speaker B: Anyway, good morning. [00:18:26] Speaker H: I have no doubt. I think she'll do a pretty good job at that. But anyway, you know, when the program started with Anisha, I thought Anisha said something about domestic violence also. [00:18:37] Speaker B: Let me go to that now. Domestic violence and custodial. [00:18:40] Speaker H: Let me say something. Okay, quick, quick, quick. A lot of people calling on your poll and they said, no, they should not have removed. [00:18:46] Speaker B: Why are you talking about that? No, we could talk about that in [00:18:48] Speaker H: the next hour, but. You want me finish? Listen, no, you should not remove corporal punishment from school. But those same persons does not want anybody to beat their daughter. And the question that I put to you, Anisa, here this morning, is that if we culture the country in a cycle of violence, why do you believe that it is not going to visit you in one way or the other. So that while it is you want corporate punishment back in school, do you want somebody to beat your daughter? That's the question I ask. [00:19:25] Speaker B: Somebody asked if you could will your debts. [00:19:27] Speaker C: If you could will your debts, you could create a will which sets out your wishes, how you want your property to be distributed before your debt. It has to be witnessed by two persons, must be signed by you for it to be. [00:19:41] Speaker B: But your debt. Your debts. [00:19:43] Speaker C: Oh, so who you want. You mean like the E. B.T.S. [00:19:46] Speaker G: yeah. [00:19:49] Speaker B: Who you want to can you will your debts? No, [00:19:54] Speaker C: let's text and why would you. Why would you want to will your [00:19:58] Speaker B: don't will mean nothing, though. Come on, will me no bank loan you take out some years ago and leave it in a will. I want to pay off this. [00:20:05] Speaker C: You know, like you can have insurance in case you die that the insurance would pay whatever loan that you have outstanding. You need to get that before you die. [00:20:13] Speaker B: All right? That is for sure. Hello. Good morning. Okay, so let's get into the part that you wanted to talk about. We have about 2 and 19 minutes or so. Let's go with that. [00:20:23] Speaker C: Yeah, but I also wanted to respond to that problem because you guys talk about corporal punishments a bit in the question in the poll, but it was already removed. So I think that's really and truly what Trinidad and Tobago needs. We need to strengthen our institutions, which includes from the family to the school to the church. And I don't think that any particular institution has a more important part to play. Obviously, parents have a very significant role in the socialization of a child. But in instances where some person probably don't have the support of a family member or a parent or someone to act as a role model to them, then the other institution has to step up. So whether it be the school, school, whether it be the church, and we all need to work together to ensure that we reduce the levels of crime and juvenile delinquency in the country. That's what I feel like. But we were going to talk about custody maintenance and domestic violence a lot of times. Any reason why I actually thought about it as well is because this month is also, I believe, suicide prevention month. Right? [00:21:24] Speaker D: Yeah. [00:21:25] Speaker C: And I do recognize that we women generally talk more. I'm not saying it's a general statement. I know a lot of men who are very in tune with their feelings, and I think that we are making stride towards men being more comfortable expressing themselves. But in instances, you know, you in a relationship geared towards men, you In a relationship, the relationship has ended. A child resulted from that relationship. You can always go, go to the family court and make an application for custody or access of that minor child. And before the court makes an order as it relates to custody and maintenance of a child, because I know persons usually question this whole paternity thing, it isn't mandatory that the person [00:22:13] Speaker F: has to [00:22:13] Speaker C: do a paternity test before the order is made, but you always have the ability to ask the court for a paternity order. You could accept the paternity if that's what you want to do, the court usually asks. And if you do in fact accept the paternity, then they will just take it as that and move on. But if you question the paternity of the child, you can always ask the court for a paternity order as well. [00:22:37] Speaker B: But if you discover five years into that the child is not yours, what is the redress you have? [00:22:43] Speaker C: So recently someone made an application to recover the money in maintenance that they paid over a period of time after realizing that the child was not theirs. But the issue with that is if, when you came to court, because the act recognizes not only a child, but they also recognize children of the family. So if you go to court and the court asks, well, do you accept that you are the father of this child? And you say, yes, your name is on the birth certificate, and you went ahead and you. And you paid the maintenance, then there's that. But, you know, so you have to take these steps, I would say beforehand, to protect yourself. If you, if you have questions as it relates to the paternity of the child, even if you may be absolutely certain, you always have the ability to ask the court and make a paternity order before an order for custody and maintenance is made. Because what usually occurs is whoever is the custodial parent. So if the court grants custody to the father, for instance, then they usually order the other parent to pay maintenance to that custodial parent. Grant access, as the case may be. And the access could be several different arrangements. It could be structured access, where you're saying, okay, every weekend, every other weekend, the mom or dad will have access to the minor child, every other alternative Christmas, alternative birthdays, that type of arrangement. It could also be liberal access, where the other parent has access to the child whenever they want. It's just a matter of just telling the other person, okay, I'm coming to pick up the child. So they aren't just, you know, restricted to just every other weekend or every weekend they could go Whenever they want to. So like those are the different access arrangements that can be fleshed out and the parties can obviously because the court's concern isn't. And whatever issues the two parents are having to spy this one or spy the other one, that's not the court's concern. The court main concern is the welfare of the minor child as stated in the act. So they will try to consider and to reach an arrangement that is best for that child. So usually what occurs at the first hearing, the court will make an interim order and then they will order. I've seen it happen time and time again that the parties possibly go to co parenting, Congress counseling to determine if they could have a better relationship amongst themselves for the sake of that minor child. They might also order for social services to go and visit where the child is living to see how the child is operating within the environment and then ask the parties to possibly have an all parties conference to determine if they could come to an agreement as it relates to the arrangement of the minor child. So the parties can then come together, have a discussion which is out of court just between the parties themselves, the parties and their attorneys and see if they could flesh out a proper arrangement as it relates to that minor child. And that could include several things. We're saying, okay, the parties, this person is going to be the custodial parent, this other person is going to have access. I'm going to have the child on July, you can have the child on August during the July, August vacation, every other birthday. Alternatively this year you would have the child on the child's birthday. Next year I'd have the child on the child's birthday and we switch for Christmas this year you would have the child only for Christmas next year and we switch. So it really and truly is about creating the best arrangement that will be best, best suited for that minor child. [00:26:11] Speaker B: Yeah, but those things are fleshed out quickly. Or is it a one sitting where all what you said? Because in my mind I don't want to go to court several times for the birthday and then come back for the Christmas and then come back for the July vacation. [00:26:23] Speaker C: So what will happen? There will be a. If the parties are able to arrive at an agreement where they. So they had an all parties conference and they agree that okay, this is what we are going to do alternative, whatever the case may be, then we go to the court, we could file the draft agreement or we could let the court know while the parties had discussions and we have agreed on these terms. So then there will be a Final order from the court where the. Well, the court order will set out these arrangements, every single thing. So. And once the final order is put in place, that is the end of the matter. But if the parties are contentious and they can't agree, then you might possibly have to go to trial to determine what is the best arrangement. And the court will then decide what final order to give, essentially. So if the parties, for instance, are contesting custody, both the mother and father wants custody of the minor child, then we'll have to go to trial to vote, ventilate that point. And the parties would have to put forward their evidence as to why they should be the custodial parent and why the other party shouldn't be. So for instance, one party could be saying, I don't want the mother to be the custodial parent because the mother is abusive to the child. So then you'll have. That evidence would have to be borne out to show the instances where the mother was in fact abusive. And the court at the end will decide that. Okay, well, based on the evidence, who I believe, who I don't believe, I then order that this person be the custodial parent. [00:27:44] Speaker B: What about a situation where both parents have stable homes, they have good jobs, they're both qualified and capable of raising the child, but they dually not duly. They want sole custody while the other just gets alternative weekends. But they want to maintain I am better for the child. [00:28:02] Speaker C: Both parties want the custody. [00:28:03] Speaker B: Both parties want custody, but they are both parties. You know, there's no child abuse. They just can't agree anymore. They just don't want to be together, but they want the child. [00:28:13] Speaker C: Okay? So the thing about it is joint custody is a thing, but if the parties aren't married, you can't get joint custody. So for instance, if the parties were married, they're going through a divorce, the parties can have joint custody of the child. [00:28:28] Speaker B: But would that be in the child's best interest? Because the joint custody looks like, what? One year with you, one year with me, one week with you, one week with you. [00:28:33] Speaker C: You can flesh it out. I actually had a client where the parties agreed that it would be one week. One week. But that only worked because they live close to each other, so it wouldn't affect where the child goes to school and their extracurricular activities and all these different things. So it was really just a situation where one week the child stayed by the father, one week the child stayed by the mother, and nobody paid maintenance to the other. They just had like that arrangement because obviously when the child is by you for that week, you just bore your own course. And when your child is by the other, you chat the other body, of course. So you can. If the parties can come together and flesh out an arrangement that is best suited, the court will give the final order. Once it works best for the child and it doesn't affect the child, it can be a situation where the mother lives Port of Spain, the father lives Rio Claro, and they want every other week because that would mean that the child would probably have to go to different schools or possibly be traversing from Rio Claro to Port of Spain every other week. [00:29:23] Speaker B: So in that instance. All right, so I know me, I play in Devil's App. I see the calls coming through and I see the questions. No, Andisa cannot stay after eight. [00:29:32] Speaker C: Yeah, I actually cannot. [00:29:33] Speaker B: She actually have to buzz Chief justice in the case. So we have about seven or eight minutes. Seven minutes. Seven minutes. Because I have some ads to run off. [00:29:42] Speaker H: Yeah. [00:29:42] Speaker B: Now we could go through, man. So anything. Rio Claro, Arima or Tinapuna. The children living, the parents living right. Again, both equally capable of raising the child. The child, the father was living in the Tinopuna area, then he move and he gone down. So but they want the fighting. But there's no abuse. It's just the situation when the child goes to school. The child goes to school because. [00:30:05] Speaker C: So to determine who would be the custodial parents, the court will consider all the circumstances of the case and the act actually flesh it out. So for instance, if the child was living, the parties were separated for a little while, but the child was living with the father for that entire time and the child knows everybody who live in there, they go to school. Schools there at the court would probably consider, and there's no issue of abuse and all these different things. The court will probably consider maintaining the status quo and I'll leave the child by the father instead of disrupting the child's entire life to put the other parent as the custodial parent. So those are factors that the court will consider. [00:30:43] Speaker B: What about if the child says, I don't want to live with mommy or daddy, I want to live with either parent, they say who they want. Again, no abuse. [00:30:50] Speaker C: So the child usually isn't in court advocating what they want. But the court does have wide ranging powers. So what they might do, they might send a social work worker to go visit the school, go visit the home, go have a conversation with the child and submit a report to the court where the child wishes could possibly be Included there, they could also appoint a child's advocate who would then be the person advocated on behalf of the child. So I'm the attorney for the mother, somebody else is the attorney for the father. But there's also a child advocate who is also an attorney at law who is advocating on behalf of the child. So that could also be an option, but the court will definitely consider the wishes of the child, but also to consider that the child probably don't really know what's best for them just yet. So it's a situation where if it becomes contentious, which that is why we'd have to go to trial and all these circumstances would have to be ventilated to say, okay, the child goes to school. The child has been living here for the child's entire life. They have siblings that live there with them, cousins, they go to extracurricular every weekend in the same Tunapuna community center, whatever the case may be. So it doesn't really make sense then in that situation, disrupting that child's life to place them with the other parents. Right. So it isn't a situation. And that's why sometimes people might say that the court is biased against mothers. But if the child has been living with the mother for the entire time, and that is what the child is accustomed to, in very exceptional circumstances, the court might disrupt that status quo to make the other person the custodial parent. [00:32:17] Speaker B: People already seen talking about the biases where the courts end up, you know, favoring the mother, which is sad, you know, during this time, the mother, the child, is encouraged to become estranged to the father, also known as parental alien. And the court makes no provision for this. [00:32:33] Speaker C: But I personally think that the family court has been making extreme strides to kind of remove some of that, because there are several instances where I got custody for the father of a minor child and the other person had to pay, meaning the mother had to pay him maintenance. It's really just a situation where you have to set out your case. And what is usually the downfall with men is that they generally don't have receipts. They generally don't have evidence to show what happened. They usually just think, you know, something happened. And it is like, well, yeah, that's that. That's just that. And usually when men come to me as clients, I have to pull and tug to get particular evidence. Whereas a woman would be able to come and say, well, I doing this, I doing that, I do near that. Which is why it might appear that it is biased. It's just really and truly, who is able to produce. [00:33:22] Speaker B: That's fact. That's fact. As men, I can tell you from experience, even with divorces, don't worry. Headache for me. [00:33:28] Speaker C: Even with divorces, there's. I mean, if the names might be on both of the parties named. Right. The property, the house. That is, if the parties have a house together. But generally it's a situation where the man will go out, he'll have work, the woman working as well, but she would be the person to nice up the house. So he would come and give her money, should go and buy whatever and everything is in her name. All the receipts is in her name. And then she's able to go to the court and say, well, I contributed way more than him. You know, you wouldn't have to go a bit further. For instance, I might tell my client, well, then one pull your bank records to show that you were pulling this money to give to her, whatever the case may be. But it's generally a situation where the women are the ones who are able [00:34:08] Speaker B: to better record keeping. And, and, and that's a factor. That's a fact. [00:34:11] Speaker C: And, and oftentimes when you go to the court, it's about who could prove their case. [00:34:15] Speaker B: And that's the thing. I mean, as men, I be honest with you, it's in w the headache to argue with you, whatever you say. And that is often our downfall because we just reach a stage where woman, you see all that and documenting and all that is a you problem. [00:34:31] Speaker C: But I would also say this, though. I would also say this, though. What I have realized that women are usually willing to go through hell and fire for their children. So they're really to go to the ends of the earth as it relates to fighting for the custody of their child. Sometimes when you get a male as your client, they'll just be like his wife. Yes, all right, I done. You know, like, they don't necessarily want. Really want to go through the whole process. So then you just end up agreeing that the other person and just you go and tell everybody that the court passed towards woman is because you weren't willing to go the full distance. [00:35:03] Speaker B: I telling you, I know going through that. [00:35:05] Speaker C: Right. [00:35:06] Speaker B: I ain't going to that you want. [00:35:07] Speaker D: Go ahead. [00:35:08] Speaker B: Go ahead. [00:35:08] Speaker C: Exactly. [00:35:09] Speaker B: You take the headache, I go sleep. [00:35:11] Speaker C: Yeah. But they are. I just want to highlight that there are several things in place to ensure that the parties are being able. [00:35:19] Speaker H: Yeah. [00:35:19] Speaker B: And treated fairly. [00:35:20] Speaker C: They usually send social workers to the house visit. Both house visit, everything. Visit the child, have a discussion and submit that report support. And that's from an independent third party explaining those things. [00:35:30] Speaker B: Guys are seeing all your messages. Does, ah, these are two questions I want to ask you. And I mean I love this question here. Alimony, Alimony being paid to a woman. Can alimony just. [00:35:41] Speaker D: No. [00:35:41] Speaker B: Just yes or no. Can alimony be paid to a man? I think is yes to either party. [00:35:48] Speaker C: Yeah. [00:35:48] Speaker B: When does it stop? Let's say a man is paying spousal maintenance for a woman. How long does he have to pay this for? When does it stop? [00:35:54] Speaker C: It usually is until you vary the order. So it usually is until the person dies on you come and you say because I also had a situation where the person came and say, well, I can't continue paying these faults and maintenance. I know I'm not retired, I don't make as much. I now have all these health problems, so I don't have enough. [00:36:12] Speaker B: What about I now have another wife? I mean I have another, I have a family. [00:36:17] Speaker C: It can't just be because I have another wife and I have children no longer afford to continue. [00:36:22] Speaker A: Right. [00:36:22] Speaker C: But the thing about. [00:36:23] Speaker B: What about if she have a man, they're not married, but he taking care of her. Well, she have a man. [00:36:28] Speaker C: All of that would be evidence to be born out to determine whether or not this spot of maintenance could end. But generally they're very far and in between. The court makes orders for sponsor maintenance. It usually situation where they deal with the property, the other party might have to pay off the other party forever property that they have. So for instance, instead of if the parties can't agree that I should have the house or the other person should have the house, they might then sell the house and then split the money or the other person could buy off the interest of the other person and then they keep it, whatever the case may be. But sports of maintenance is different sports and maintenance is saying every month I want to get a thousand dollars, whatever the case may be from the other party. And usually that is ordered in situations where for instance the woman they met when they were 19, she was a homemaker, she stayed at home, she didn't further her education, she essentially took care of the children and she didn't work for the entire time we were married for 30 years, she's now 40 something and she has probably a medical problem and that can go out and work. In those circumstances the court might deem it fit to order spousal maintenance for the other party. So it really actually depends on the situation. The court really. And you have to generally do a lot of convincing when you want spousal maintenance. So the court doesn't just go and say, okay, I just want to order this man to pay or this woman to pay. That. [00:37:50] Speaker B: And last question, are prenups legal in Trinidad and Tobago? [00:37:54] Speaker C: We don't recognize prenups, but in the act they allow for agreements like disagreements. So if the parties settled what agreements that they want, it could possibly, possibly be upheld by the court. But it isn't particularly legal in Trinidad. [00:38:08] Speaker B: It's not particularly legal. But if you all have a, a gentleman's agreement, so to speak. Yeah. If they have a doctor before lawyers, you'll drop things that way you come with this and that. If we divorce, if this, that is that if that is set out first. Yeah, it could be. It could stand up eventually. Might it mean. [00:38:25] Speaker E: It might. [00:38:25] Speaker C: So it might be. This is the agreement of the parties. We'll. Unless if there's see that, you know, at the time it could. The court will then look at the situation and say, well, maybe at the time one party had a bigger power over the other and that was kind of forced them to, to do those kind of situations. So it's. Another court will automatically uphold the agreement, [00:38:45] Speaker B: but they can't consider it prenuptial agreements in Trinidad and Tobago. It's not legal. It's not on our law books. Thank you very much. Andisa. That concludes justice for today. [00:38:55] Speaker A: The best insight, feedback, accountability, the all new Talk Radio Freedom 106.5.