Difference between revisions of "Basic Principles of Spousal Support"

As to what constitutes a “marriage-like relationship”, the courts take a holistic approach.  The presence or absence of any particular factor is not determinative: [http://canlii.ca/t/1txxkand Austin v. Goerz] 2007 BCCA 586 and [http://canlii.ca/t/gm9nx Weber v Leclerc], 2015 BCCA 492.  It does not require a blending of finances, monogamy, planning for retirement or death, a decision to have children, or other hallmarks of traditional (whatever that is) marriage.  The presence of such factors can help; but their absence may not be fatal.  What is essential is that the court can see a committed relationship in some sense sufficient to raise an obligation for support.  That may sound circular (and it is), but it is nonetheless the task for a judge where the question is in doubt.

If the parties have a child, and live together with that child in a marriage-like relationship, a plain reading of the statute suggests that not only is two years co-habitation not required, any length of cohabitation will do. So far, at least one case seems to agree:  [http://canlii.ca/t/gfdtg J.M. v R.B.], 2014 BCPC 269, at paragraph 90 (discussing the a similar test under section 39).