MIT Conferences in Alberta: What Are They and How Can You Be Successful?

A Mandatory Intake Triage Conference (“MIT”) is the first step in Alberta’s new Family Focused Protocol in the Court of King’s Bench. It is the first stage of the process at which the parties’ matter is addressed before a Justice.

After the parties have exchanged financial disclosure, attended mediation, and filed their Parenting After Separation course certificates, they may proceed to an MIT before their assigned MIT Justice. There are two primary objectives of an MIT:

1. To resolve any interim application filed with the materials required for the MIT;
   and
2. To establish a roadmap toward resolution of the matter.

Typically, the interim application portion of the one- or two-hour session takes place at the outset. The MIT Justice has discretion regarding the length of submissions and whether the application is appropriate for determination through the MIT process. Once the interim application has been addressed, the session generally becomes less formal and focuses on identifying the genuine issues between the parties and determining what steps are necessary to move the matter toward resolution.

In some cases, several MITs may be required to determine the appropriate process for ultimately proceeding to trial. Following the MIT, the Justice will provide an MIT Report setting out the issues discussed, any agreements reached between the parties, the Orders that must be filed, and, where appropriate, permission to schedule a subsequent MIT.

How to Be Successful at an MIT

The Interim Application

The application portion of an MIT is a relatively limited process. The applicant is generally restricted to a five-page affidavit accompanied by up to 25 pages of exhibits. The respondent may then file a five-page responding affidavit with up to 25 pages of exhibits.

The parties generally have no more than one hour to address the application. Accordingly, applications should be relatively straightforward, should not require extensive evidence, and should generally be interim in nature.

It is possible to request a second MIT for the specific purpose of addressing a more complex application involving written arguments and expanded evidence. However, such a request will likely need to be made to the MIT Justice at the first MIT.

To maximize the likelihood that an application will be heard successfully, it should be sufficiently narrow in scope to be appropriately addressed through the MIT process.

Establishing a Roadmap to Resolution

With respect to the roadmap-to-resolution portion of the MIT, it is first necessary to consider what constitutes success. A successful MIT results in a plan that is sufficiently thorough to address the parties’ outstanding issues while remaining proportionate to the complexity and significance of those issues.

It is therefore important that both the litigants and their lawyers have a comprehensive understanding of the issues in dispute and attend the MIT prepared to address those issues in a practical and proportional manner. The more specific the parties can be regarding the issues and the proposed process for resolving them, the more likely it is that the MIT will result in an effective roadmap to resolution.

The following matters should be carefully considered before attending an MIT:

• Experts: Are experts required? If so, how long will they require to prepare their reports? Are they available? Will they need to be qualified as experts by the Court at trial? If the expert is a financial expert or business valuator, do they have the information necessary to commence their work? If not, what information will they require, and how long will it take to obtain it?
• Rebuttal experts: If the opposing party has retained an expert, will a rebuttal expert be required? The same considerations regarding availability, information, and timing should be addressed.
• Support: If support is in issue, what specific dates are being sought for the commencement and termination of support?
• Financial disclosure: Has all necessary financial disclosure been exchanged? If not, what disclosure remains outstanding, and what steps are required to obtain it?
• Settlement: Is there a realistic prospect of settlement through further mediation, whether with a third-party mediator or through Judge-led mediation?
• Parenting: If parenting is in dispute, is counsel for the child required?
• Interim applications: Are any additional interim applications required before the matter can proceed to trial?
• Trial format: Is a streamlined trial appropriate in the circumstances?
• Trial length: How many days are likely to be required for the trial?
• Evidence: How should the evidence be presented to the Court?
• Witnesses: What third-party witnesses may be required at trial?
• Questioning: How much time is likely to be required for questioning at trial?
• Scheduling: Are there any scheduling issues that should be identified and addressed at an early stage?

These considerations may appear basic; however, addressing them effectively requires a thorough understanding of the facts and issues in the particular matter. That understanding is necessary to develop a process that is both practical and proportionate to the issues in dispute.

An MIT requires careful preparation and a clear understanding of the objectives of the process. Parties and counsel who arrive prepared to identify the genuine issues, propose practical solutions, and establish a proportionate path toward resolution are more likely to obtain a useful and effective roadmap for the remainder of their case.

For an overview of Alberta’s full Family Focused Protocol and how a case moves from intake through trial, read our earlier guide here.