The Civil Code does not subject couples who simply live together to the family patrimony and a matrimonial regime. Perhaps one day they will be required to do so. Some, like Lola, dream of it, while others, like Éric, don't even dare to think about it.
Until today, the Civil Code of Quebec and jurisprudence do not grant the same rights to married spouses and common-law partners. So, two common-law partners, who have been living together for 25 years, end their relationship and stop living together.
The woman goes to Court and claims compensation of over $300,000 for domestic work, childcare expenses, education expenses, and clothing expenses for their 27-year-old daughter. The woman argues that there was a "quasi-contract based on the doctrine of unjust enrichment" and that the man "enriched himself at her expense during their cohabitation."
The Superior Court rules in favor of the woman and grants compensation of $40,000. The man appeals the decision.
The Court of Appeal* agrees that "it is undeniable that (the woman) performed unpaid domestic tasks for the benefit of (the man) [...] but [...] this contribution to the household chores needs to be put into context, and we need to see how the final burden of daily life was divided between the partners."
The evidence shows that the man has always taken care of all expenses related to the residence and their daughter's education, on his own. The Court of Appeal overturns the decision of the trial court and concludes that "the enrichment that (the man) benefited from was compensated for in other ways during the 25-year cohabitation, and (the woman) did not become impoverished as a result."
Until today, the Civil Code does not subject couples simply living together to family patrimony and matrimonial regimes. Maybe one day, they will be subject to them. Some, like Lola, dream of it, while others, like Eric, don't even dare to think about it.
*C.A. Montreal 500-09-017755-075
