Robert Shawyer, Principal

Robert ShawyerRobert Shawyer is the founder of Shawyer Family Law & Mediation. His practice focuses on collaborative law, mediation and litigation in the area of family law.

To supplement his law degree from the University Of Windsor School Of Law, to better serve both his client’s and his community, Robert has completed the following training:

2019 — Certificate in Adjudication for Administrative Agencies, Boards and Tribunals
Osgoode Hall Law School Professional Development, Toronto, ON

2019 — Not-For-Profit Governance Essentials Program
Institute of Corporate Directors and Rotman School of Management

2016 — Mediation Training and Certification
393 Mediate and Ontario Association of Family Law Mediator (OAFM) 

2014 — Collaborative Law Training
Karen Thompson-Harry and Marie Nickle

When Robert finished his training, he joined following legal associations of which he continues as an active and engaged member:

  • Collaborative Practice Toronto
  • Ontario Association for Family Mediation (OAFM)

In order to receive his accreditation as a mediator Robert he interned with Riverdale Mediation and took courses accredited by the Law Society of Upper Canada (LSUC) in:

  • Basic Family Negotiation & Mediation,
  • Advanced Family Mediation & Negotiation; and
  • Screening for Family Violence, Abuse and Power Imbalances in domestic relationship

In his career as a family law lawyer has appeared and continues to appear before the following Courts in Ontario:

  • Court of Appeal;
  • Divisional Court of Justice;
  • Superior Court of Justice;
  • Ontario Court of Justice

As a result of Robert’s work as counsel in the following cases Ontario’s Child Support law was amended to allow disabled children of unmarried separated parents to receive life long support. The amendment received Royal Ascent on December 14, 2017.

  • Coates v. Watson 2017 CarswellOnt 10653
  • Vivian v. Courtney 2013 CarswellOnt 11609

Robert is also one of only two (2) lawyers to ever challenge the provisions of Ontario’s adoption law that prevent biological parents from appealing an adoption in Ontario.

When Robert is not working on behalf of client’s advocating for family law reform he acts as counsel to client’s in the following types of cases:

  • Adoption
  • Custody
  • Access
  • Child protection
  • Parental alienation
  • Support Cases

Some of the recent cases that Robert has acted as counsel in are:

Ainslie v. O’Neill 2018 ONCA 858– An appeal to the Ontario Court of Appeal regarding the issue of the test for leave to bring a motion to change and the constitutionality of Rule 1(8) of the Family Law Rules;

Maldonado v. Feliciano 2018 ONCJ 652-A decision regarding whether the Ontario Court of Justices has jurisdiction over a child resident in Florida who has returned to Ontario for access and where the parties’ had attorned to the juridiction in Florida where the child is habitually resident;

Coates v. Watson 2017 CarswellOnt 10653– A decision as a result of a Notice of Constitutional Question determining that s. 31 of Ontario’s Family Law Act is unconstitutional as it is discriminatory pursuant to s. 15 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms;

Children’s Aid Society of Toronto v. R.(T) 2017 CarswellOnt 5779– Summary Judgement Motion regarding issue of finding in need of protection and the general principles governing the law governing placement of children involved with a Children’s Aid Society after a finding in need of protection;

Fry (Litigation guaridan of) v. Fry 2016 CarswellOnt 20581– Decision regarding costs payable by a “special party” represented by the Office of the Public Guardian and Trustee after a motion for partition and sale matrimonial property and determination of the issue of costs payable by a special party’s former solicitor of record arising from a motion regarding sale of matrimonial property;

Catholic Children’s Aid Society of Toronto v. F.(M.) 2016 CarswellOnt14989-Summary Judgement Motion regarding issue of finding in need of protection in relation to a special party represented by the Office of the Public Guardian and Trustee and the factors to be considered when making a determination as to a finding in need of protection, the factors to be considered when a parent of a child is physically or mentally ill, and the factors involved in determining access where a child made a Crown Ward for the purposes of adoption;

R.(J.D.) v. L.(M.K.) 2015 CarswellOnt 3216– Decision clarifying and explaining the law and governing legal principles regarding dispensing with a  biological parent’s consent to an adoption of a child

Evangelista v. Galloro 2014 CarswellOnt 5839– Decision regarding the issue of costs in family law procedings and the scale of costs to be awarded

Evangelista v. Galloro 2014 CarswellOnt 224– Decision regarding the jurisdiction of the Ontario Court of Justice verses the Ontario Superior Court of Justice in regards to the determination of a vexatious litigant designation and the determination a motion to change child support and s. 7 expenses.

Vivian v. Courtney 2013 CarswellOnt 11609– Decision regarding and explaining the jurisdiction of the Ontario Divisional Court of Justice arising out of an appeal of a child support order and a Notice of Constitutional Question challenging s. 31 of the Ontario’s Family Law as violating s. 15 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

Evangelista v. Galloro, 2013 ONCJ 543– Decision regarding the issue of access on a motion to change and a discussion regarding the general principles surrounding access and no acess orders and the burden to be discharged on a motion to change

S.(N.) v. N.(C.) 2013 CarswellOnt 2731– Determination of a child support under federal and provincial guidelines, a determination of the amount of s. 7 expenses owing and a decision regarding the general principals governing the determination of an awar of child support and s. 7 expenses.

S.(N.) v. N.(C.) 2013 CarswellOnt 3021– A trial judgement outlining the factors to be considered when determining the issue of custody of children when a parent been found to have actively engaged in parental alienation and the children have been justifiably or realistically estranged from the other parent as a result of that parent’s behaviour.

For more information on Robert and his practice, visit his personal website.