1,399
edits
Difference between revisions of "Separation and the Law"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
m
→The date of separation
Nate Russell (talk | contribs) |
|||
| Line 33: | Line 33: | ||
In general, the date of separation will have the following effects: | In general, the date of separation will have the following effects: | ||
* | *Each spouse becomes entitled to a half-interest in all family property, whether that property is owned jointly or in the name of the other spouse only. | ||
* | *The spouses each become responsible (as between the spouses) for one half of family debts. | ||
* | *Any property either spouse obtains after the date of separation is their own separate property, and not family property. | ||
* | *Any debt either spouse incurs after the date of separation is that spouse's sole responsibility. | ||
* | *Unmarried (ie. common-law) spouses have two years past the ''date of separation'' to start a claim in court for division of family property, spousal support, or sharing of family debts, if they cannot otherwise agree, and | ||
* | *Married spouses have two years from the date of their ''divorce'' to bring claims in court for division of family property, spousal support, or division of debts. | ||
The [[Property_%26_Debt_in_Family_Law_Matters|Property & Debt]] chapter talks about the first four issues in more detail; the [[Spousal Support]] chapter talks about the last issue. | The [[Property_%26_Debt_in_Family_Law_Matters|Property & Debt]] chapter talks about the first four issues in more detail; the [[Spousal Support]] chapter talks about the last issue. | ||
| Line 52: | Line 52: | ||
This is helpful, because the old ''Family Relations Act'' didn't talk about separation in any detail. However, the phrase in s. 3(4)(b), "the court may consider," suggests that this section isn't a comprehensive listing of things the court should consider, and the cases about separation are still very helpful. Here are some of the highlights: | This is helpful, because the old ''Family Relations Act'' didn't talk about separation in any detail. However, the phrase in s. 3(4)(b), "the court may consider," suggests that this section isn't a comprehensive listing of things the court should consider, and the cases about separation are still very helpful. Here are some of the highlights: | ||
''Herman v. Herman'' | ''[https://www.canlii.org/en/ns/nssc/doc/1969/1969canlii839/1969canlii839.html?resultIndex=9 Herman v. Herman]'', 1969 CanLII 839 (NS SC) | ||
<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> | ||