If a decision is not in favour of both parties, should both parties consider retaining counsel?
Manitoba, Canada
The following excerpt is from Heintz v. Heintz, 2009 MBQB 304 (CanLII):
For the benefit of both parties, and to be fair to each, I indicated that if either thought it important to have counsel when the decision did not go their way, they should seriously consider retaining counsel in advance of the hearing. The failure to do so might leave them otherwise restricted or disadvantaged on appeal should they seek to introduce new evidence that ought to have been called at the time of the first hearing. They might also be limited if they sought to argue positions that ought to have been advanced at the initial hearing (see Hudson v. Hudson, 2009 MBCA 63; M.J. No. 186).
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.
Other Questions
Is a party entitled to party and party costs? (Manitoba, Canada)
Is there any case law where an umpire considered information of one party without the knowledge of the other party? (Manitoba, Canada)
Can an application to suppress the true identity of parties to contemplated litigation be made without notice to the other parties? (Manitoba, Canada)
In what circumstances will a party be bound by a third party's expectation of receiving something in return? (Manitoba, Canada)
Are party and party costs appropriate on Class III on a motion? (Manitoba, Canada)
What factors will be considered in determining whether counsel is needed to ensure a fair trial or the appearance of the jury? (Manitoba, Canada)
Can an applicant argue that an arbitrator or tribunal has not explicitly considered every argument or issue raised by the parties? (Manitoba, Canada)
When will an arbitrator's decision be considered unreasonable? (Manitoba, Canada)
When a payor's pension is equalized with respect to property equalization, does the court need to consider the equalization also consider the value of the payor’s pension? (Manitoba, Canada)
Does the doctrine supporting finality of court decisions apply equally to decisions made by administrative officers or tribunals? (Manitoba, Canada)
