Canada: Common law couples deserve fair shares when separating, top court rules

Submitted by DenisP on Fri, 2011-02-18 23:45

Article here. Excerpt:

'The Supreme Court of Canada made it easier today for common law couples who split up to claim a fair share of property or assets they played a substantial role in building.

Ruling unanimously on two cases that involved estranged common law couples, the Court emphasized that when one partner has contributed substantially to a business, property or the success of the other’s career, they should gain a benefit that properly reflects their contribution.

The Court stressed the importance of adopting a flexible approach when it comes to assessing the relative role of each partner and working out a dollar amount that reflects those roles.'

Like0 Dislike0

Comments

What exactly defines "substantial" contribution to assets or property?
Want to guess that definition is different depending on which side of the court you're on?
Or better yet, which gender you are?

MAJ

Like0 Dislike0
Submitted by digital_dreamer on Sat, 2011-02-19 05:05

It looks like PALamony is now legal in Canada. This is just another way to go after men who are smart enough to realize that marriage is a bad deal for them.

Basically the following is happening: men are smart enough not to get married, and women will live with them anyway. So the government simply pretends that all couples living together for any significant amount of time are married when they break up. Add into the deal that the man doesn't get any of the legal benefits of marriage during the relationship, and we have a terrible ruling for men.

Of course men in Canada are going to wise up to this ruling and modify their behavior, just like they modified their behavior after marriage became a huge burden.

From one of the Canadian posters:

"My buddy has a rule for the ladies, no more than 3 consecutive nights in his house, then back to your own."

I'm willing to bet that as more men see the disastrous results of this ruling in their personal lives, this behavior will become the new norm.

Like0 Dislike0
Submitted by insdel2005 on Mon, 2011-02-21 04:28

" Add into the deal that the man doesn't get any of the legal benefits of marriage during the relationship, and we have a terrible ruling for men."

What legal benefit's does one benefit from marriage? I can no find a single benefit that requires marriage in order to receive.

That said, this common law arrangement has been around for a long while in most provinces (Quebec only recently adopted it), this just males it more publicly known.

Like0 Dislike0
Submitted by Kratch on Mon, 2011-02-21 19:50

"It looks like PALamony is now legal in Canada. This is just another way to go after men who are smart enough to realize that marriage is a bad deal for them."

That is so incredibly corrupt. Furthermore what type of "relationships" does it apply to, roommates, best friends, gay couples, love triangle... How can there be any expectations when not even a contract has been signed?

Like0 Dislike0
Submitted by fondueguy on Tue, 2011-02-22 07:40

"Furthermore what type of "relationships" does it apply to"

It applies to a sexual domestic relationship where the parties have been living together as a couple for ether 1 or 3 years (not sure, may change by province)

Like0 Dislike0
Submitted by Kratch on Wed, 2011-02-23 02:25