Difference between revisions of "Separation and the Law"

Jump to navigation Jump to search
Line 56: Line 56:
<blockquote>"[A]s long as the spouses treat the parting or absence, be it long or short, as temporary and not permanent, the couple is not living separately even though physically it is living apart. In <span class="noglossary">order</span> to come within the clear meaning of the words 'separate and apart' in the statute, there must need be not only a physical absence one from the other, but also a destruction of the consortium vitae or as the act terms it, marriage breakdown."</blockquote>
<blockquote>"[A]s long as the spouses treat the parting or absence, be it long or short, as temporary and not permanent, the couple is not living separately even though physically it is living apart. In <span class="noglossary">order</span> to come within the clear meaning of the words 'separate and apart' in the statute, there must need be not only a physical absence one from the other, but also a destruction of the consortium vitae or as the act terms it, marriage breakdown."</blockquote>


''[http://canlii.ca/t/g1493 Rowland v. Rowland]'', 1969 CanLII 500 (ON SC)
''[http://canlii.ca/t/g1493 Rowland v. Rowland]'' 1969 CanLII 500 (ON SC)


<blockquote>"[T]he words 'living separate' connote an attitude of mind in the spouses in which they regard themselves as withdrawn from each other."</blockquote>
<blockquote>"[T]he words 'living separate' connote an attitude of mind in the spouses in which they regard themselves as withdrawn from each other."</blockquote>


''McDorman v. McDorman'', New Brunswick Supreme Court, 1972:
''McDorman v. McDorman'' (1972), 11 R.F.L. 83 (NBSC)


<blockquote>"While the mere living separate and apart of the spouses may not be conclusive of the fact that there has been a permanent breakdown of the marriage, especially in cases where the separation may have been brought about … by enforced hospitalization … all of the circumstances accompanying such separation must be considered in determining whether or not it has in fact led to a permanent marriage breakdown."</blockquote>
<blockquote>"While the mere living separate and apart of the spouses may not be conclusive of the fact that there has been a permanent breakdown of the marriage, especially in cases where the separation may have been brought about … by enforced hospitalization … all of the circumstances accompanying such separation must be considered in determining whether or not it has in fact led to a permanent marriage breakdown."</blockquote>


''Lachman v. Lachman'', Ontario Court of Appeal, 1970:
''[http://canlii.ca/t/g161p Lachman v. Lachman]'' 1970 CanLII 477 (ON CA)


<blockquote>"A marital relationship is broken down when one only of the spouses is without the intent for it to subsist."</blockquote>
<blockquote>"A marital relationship is broken down when one only of the spouses is without the intent for it to subsist."</blockquote>