What's not to like about their new stance on unmarrieds?
.....Unmarried Quebec couples who live together and then split up are not entitled to the same rights as legally married couples, when it comes to spousal support, the Supreme Court of Canada has ruled.
By a 5-4 margin, the top court decision released Friday says the province's civil code is constitutional in its treatment of the financial entitlement of couples who are not legally married and who separate.
The decision means Quebec remains the only province that does not recognize "de facto" marriages.
The ruling has broad implications in a province where the 31.5 per cent of couples report being in de facto relationships, versus an average of 12.1 per cent in the rest of Canada.
Justice Louis LeBel, writing for the five-judge majority, said there was no charter violation at play because the current provincial law promotes autonomy.
"The Quebec National Assembly has not favoured one form of union over another," he wrote.
"The legislature has merely defined the legal content of the different forms of conjugal relationships. It has made consent the key to changing the spouses' mutual patrimonial relationship............
This is a nonsensical ruling from the idiot court. How can that apply only to Quebec and not to the other provinces? wait, I forgot, Quebec is a seperate country afterall.
ReplyDeleteAnother comment I wish to make regarding this quote: "Quebec National Assembly has not favoured one form of union over another"
In most cases, this will favour the male for all practical intents when the common law relationship breaks down.
Anyway, the end result is that a hell of a lot of common law women are going be want to be officially married. Then they will see the true colours of their man.
My position is that legal rulings on marriages should be uniformly applied to the whole country, as far as I am concerned, it should be a federal policy.