160,000 marriages in 1 day in BC.

[heirmiles]

Our new family act in BC just came into effect today. Common Law relationships for two or more years now have almost all rights of regular marriages, with the exception of pre-relationship assets. Does this include non traditional relationships as well?

Clear message: if you keep the same partner, the warranty ends in two years; if you've kept the same partner for two years as of today all warranties are cancelled

 

[saved24]

Seriously? and I'm curious what do you mean by warranty? I missed that on the news.

 

[heirmiles]

Sorry, a little unclear I guess.

Local news stations reported that the institution of the new Families Act in BC fills in all the legal responsibilities of live-in partners on a common law basis to equal those of people who are legally married. Hence the "Same as Marriage" headlines of March 18th. The minimum length of time for living together for this to apply in Common Law marriages is now 2 years. This law acts retroactively, so that means that any couple that has been living together for 2 or more years as of March 18th, are now considered legally married under the law. That figure happens to be about 160,000 common law relationships in BC, that are now considered to be legally married.

As far as warranties go. People who live together 'in general' and have not been through a marriage ceremony and are not wanting to make that life long commitment, have, now in the past, had the option of breaking up without any legal responsibility to each other. In other words: "if you don't like the toy, you can always take it back and get a new one". It describes a phenomena of "relationship consumerism". With a warranty you can always take something that doesn't work back to where you got it from, and get a new replacement. From what I have seen in our society that is very similar to many people living together without the commitment of actual marriage.

Now with the limit set at two years, after two years one can no longer get rid of their partner without having to "pay" (shared assests, alimony, child support etc.) according to BC civil law.

Does that make sense?

 

[saved24]

Yes, it makes sense. Thank you.

I'll respond more later. I like how you explain it and I'm going to think about what you have shared.

God bless.

 

[Skaloop]

Personally, I think it's a bad law (act, bill, whatever). If people want the perks of common-law, they can get it. But it shouldn't be forced upon anyone just because they were together for two years. In university, I lived with another guy for two years. Would that count as common-law if it happened now? What if a guy and a girl live together as platonic friends for a few years, then they have a falling out? Would either be able to make any claims under the new common-law law?

 

[saved24]

Personally, I think it's a bad law (act, bill, whatever). If people want the perks of common-law, they can get it. But it shouldn't be forced upon anyone just because they were together for two years. In university, I lived with another guy for two years. Would that count as common-law if it happened now? What if a guy and a girl live together as platonic friends for a few years, then they have a falling out? Would either be able to make any claims under the new common-law law?

Good point! My Aunty (who lived in Holland) was helping out a handicapped lady, they became friends. She needed a place to stay, so my Aunty let her stay with her. They would help each other. My Aunty was a lot older so in the end her young friend helped her just as much as she had helped her. The law in Holland said they had to be called a couple, even though they were just friends. This did not please my Aunty or her friend, Maybe this is where this new Canadian law will end up. That is not a good thing!