Common-Law partner and married couples should share the same right or not? This is a much debated topic in the last few years, as the number of common-law partners show a rise quite significantly.
Many advocate the concept and express that, common-law partners should have the same set of rights as married couples, however, there are many who strongly oppose this concept and don’t want to bring the both on the same platform.
A recent development
Supreme Court of Canada has recently given a verdict that Quebec need not provide the same set of rights and benefits to the common law partners as they are enjoyed by married partners.
According to the civil code of Quebec, the rights of unmarried common-law couples are not discriminated.
The court has supported the existing laws of Quebec and termed them as “quite constitutional”.
A woman and her ex-partner were involved in a case and three children were involved in the case too. The woman wanted spousal support from her common-law partner after they got separated from each other. And she wanted this support to help her raise her children.
The lady lost her case in 2010 after a verdict coming from a Court in Quebec which opined that making the lady win would give a chance to people to opt out of any marital relationship.
Impact of the development
The law in Quebec indicates that the partners need not owe each other when they live under common-law. However, other provinces wherein such a law does not exist will probably have to take a relook at their own law books.
The opinions on the decision
There are people who have been supporting the verdict, as they strongly feel that if the case would have won, then people would have been encouraged to “disobey the institution of marriage”.
Many feel that a clear distinction between “marriage” and “common law partners” is quite necessary for ensuring smooth functioning of the society.
After all, the children who are born to these relationships are also in a lurch and may undergo a stage when they feel crisis of their own identity.
Hence, the step is supported by many who are string supporters of the “institution of marriage”.