2012 QCCA 191, 2012 QCCA 191

Droit de la famille — 12144 2012 QCCA 191 COURT OF APPEAL CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC REGISTRY OF MONTREAL No: 500-09-022308-126 ( 500-12-296166-089 ) MINUTES OF THE HEARING DATE: January 30, 2012 THE HONOURABLE PIERRE J. DALPHOND, J.A. PETITIONER ATTORNEY A. M. In person RESPONDENT ATTORNEY N. R. ABSENT MOTION FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL FROM A JUDGMENT RENDERED ON DECEMBER 12, 2011 BY THE HON. HÉLÈNE POULIN OF THE SUPERIOR COURT DISTRICT OF MONTREAL

Clerk: Annick Nguyen Court Room: RC.18 HEARING 11:09 Commencement of the hearing. Madam R. is not present. Submission by Mr. M.. 11h20 : PAR LE JUGE. Jugement – Voir page 3. Annick Nguyen Clerk JUDGMENT [ 1 ] I am seized with a motion seeking leave to appeal pursuant to

article 26 et 494 C.c.p. from a judgment rendered by the Superior Court on December 12, 2011, granting a divorce and making some corollary orders regarding custody and child support, including arrears. [ 2 ] An appeal from such a judgment is governed by

section 21 of the Divorce Act and not by the Code of civil procedure. S. 21 provides for a de plano right of appeal within 30 days; no permission is needed. [ 3 ] Though I could extend the delay to file an inscription, I am of the view that the grounds raised in the motion are bound to fail. In fact, the petitioner would like the Court to order the production of certain information from his former spouse (unrepresented), to blame his former attorney for the conduct of the trial and to reassess the evidence.

Clearly the petitioner's motion is related to a misunderstanding of the appeal process that can be explained by the fact that he acts now without the assistance of a lawyer. [ 4 ] Finally, it is noteworthy that the accumulated arrears are due only as of December 2012 (para. 12 of the judgment) and that no new child support is to be paid until he resumes working (para. 13 of the judgment). [ 5 ] FOR ALL THESE REASONS , the motion is DISMISSED, without costs. PIERRE J. DALPHOND, J.A.