In Family Law proceedings, there is no such thing as "off the record." Every text, email, or messaging app exchange with the other party or their legal representative can—and likely will—be annexed to an affidavit.
The Rule: Draft every communication as if the Judge is reading over your shoulder. Separate your "stream of consciousness" from your keyboard. If you wouldn't want a Judge reading your unfiltered reaction, do not press send. Let the communication sit for 24 hours if necessary.
The adversarial system relies on narrative. Opposing counsel will frequently send detailed correspondence outlining their client’s version of events. If that narrative contains factual inaccuracies or distortions, you cannot wait until a trial a year later to dispute it.
The Rule: Contemporaneously correct the record. If you receive correspondence that misrepresents a material fact, reply promptly in writing to concisely rebut the inaccuracy. This prevents the opposing side from claiming later that you implicitly accepted their version of events by your silence.
It is a common mistake to try and emotionally engage the Judicial Officer. Judges are tasked with applying legislation to proven facts; they are not counselors.
The Rule: Present objectively. If you rely on emotional appeals, the Court may view you as reactive or difficult to manage. Treat the litigation process as a purely administrative exercise. Give the Judge the dates, events, and evidence they need to do their job.
A Notice to Admit is one of the most powerful, yet underutilized, tools available to an SRL. It is a formal document requiring the other party to admit or deny specific, material facts before the trial.
The Rule: Use this tool to narrow the issues in dispute. It forces the opposing side to lock in their position on the facts early in the process, preventing them from flip-flopping their narrative later when it suits them.
You are never required to agree to terms, consent orders, or unrecorded expert assessments simply because you feel pressured in the moment. The Court relies on due process; if it comes down to your memory versus an expert's unrecorded notes, the expert will prevail.
The Rule: If you do not understand what you are being asked to agree to, do not agree. State clearly: "I object," or "I require more time to seek independent advice on this proposal." Protect yourself by requesting that expert interviews be recorded, where permissible.
While Court staff and Judicial Officers cannot give you legal advice (tell you what to argue), they are obligated to provide procedural assistance to self-represented litigants to ensure a fair hearing.
The Rule: Ask questions in Court. If you do not understand the procedural implications of a ruling, respectfully ask the Judge for clarification. If they direct you elsewhere, utilize the Court Registry. Do not leave the room guessing what just happened.
When drafting submissions, it is crucial to understand the difference between offensive and defensive arguments.
The Rule: If the opposing party has transgressed on an issue, and you have a clean record on that same issue, that fact is a Weapon to be deployed in your submissions. If both parties share blame regarding a specific behavior, that issue is a Shield—keep it in reserve and only raise it defensively if the opposing side attempts to attack you on that front. Always highlight fundamental inconsistencies: if the Court is asked to heavily weigh the emotional state of one party, respectfully submit that equal weight must be applied to the emotional toll of the proceedings on the other.