CASE NO. VOL. NO. PAGE
CECIL ALLISTER MILLS - and - TENA LOUISE HARDY
(Appellant) (Respondent)
Halifax, N.S.
CA 164077 BATEMAN, J.A.
[Cite as: Mills v. Hardy, 2000 NSCA 140]
APPEAL HEARD: November 23, 2000
JUDGMENT DELIVERED: December 4, 2000
SUBJECT: Appointment of counsel in family law matter.
SUMMARY: The appellant, Cecil Mills, is a party to a custody proceeding in the Supreme Court. He has been represented by both private and Legal Aid lawyers at times but those relationships have ended. He holds a Legal Aid certificate entitling him to funded counsel but maintains that he cannot find a lawyer to represent him. He applied to the pre-trial judge asking the Court to appoint counsel. The judge declined to appoint counsel. Alternatively, Mr. Mills unsuccessfully sought the Court’s permission to be represented by a lay person. Mr. Mills appealed both rulings. The other party did not participate in the appeal
ISSUES: Did the judge err in refusing to appoint counsel or permit representation by a lay person?
|
This information sheet does not form part of the court’s decision. Quotes must be from the judgment, not this cover sheet. The full court judgment consists of 14 pages. |
RESULT: Appeal dismissed. This is a discretionary order. In these circumstances the judge made no error in ruling as he did.