Court ruling confirms ‘freedom of choice’
It may be time to review family regime in Civil Code, justice minister says
QUEBEC — Bertrand St-Arnaud, Quebec’s justice minister, applauded a Supreme Court of Canada ruling Friday upholding Quebec’s distinction between married and unmarried couples, saying it confirms “freedom of choice” in the province.
In a five-four decision, the high court rejected the case of “Lola,” the pseudonym of an unmarried woman seeking the same rights a divorced woman would have to share the assets of her ex-partner and father of their three children.
The father is “Eric,” a wellknown Quebec billionaire, who also cannot be named.
But in saying he was “satisfied” and “relieved” that the high court did not strike down as unconstitutional provisions in the Quebec Civil Code, St-Arnaud also said “the door is open” to a full review of Civil Code family law articles.
“In the last decades, our family and social reality has evolved,” the minister said. “Is it time for us again to think about the family regime in Civil Code? Maybe.
“Today the door is certainly open for general reflection on our family regime.”
But he would first have to discuss such a “reflection” with his cabinet colleagues.
“Maybe,” St-Arnaud said. “I will think about that in the next weeks and we’ll see what we will do. But that’s my opinion right now.”
The minister noted the issue has been discussed sev- eral times in the last 30 years and each time the National Assembly came down on the side of “freedom of choice.”
And he said an unmarried couple seeking the same rights and obligations of marriage can choose a civil union, cohabitation agreements and joint ownership of property to share assets.
Speaking in English, St-Arnaud said of the ruling Friday: “This decision confirms the principle of freedom of choice, which has always governed life in Quebec.
“In other words, the freedom of couples to choose the rules that will govern their union and to choose whether or not to be subject to the legal consequences of marriage.”
The Supreme Court majority accepted that Quebec’s rules for unmarried couples did not contravene the equality of rights guarantee in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
St-Arnaud said a contrary ruling would have had serious consequences, because it would mean that the Supreme Court, with a majority of judges from outside Quebec, had overruled the elected National Assembly, using the Charter of Rights and Freedoms in the 1982 constitution that Quebec has not signed.
“I’m happy today, even if it is by the skin of the teeth, that the Supreme Court has declared our Civil Code legal.”
In a release, Quebec’s Conseil du statut de la femme expressed its concerns about the judgment, questioning whether the present family law regime corresponds to the reality of Quebec families, and saying there is a risk without guarantees that families will fall into poverty.
The Conseil called on the justice minister to look into the impact on unmarried couples who now do not have the same rights as married couples.
The Fédération des associations de familles monoparentales et recomposées du Québec, representing singleparent and reconstituted families, called the high court decision “disappointing,” saying it risks perpetuating “grave injustice” in Quebec.
“By not granting equality of treatment between children born out of marriage and those whose parents are married, the Civil Code creates two classes of children based on the civil status of their parents,” said federation director Sylvie Lévesque.
The Coalition Avenir Québec called the Supreme Court ruling “good news for (Quebec’s) 1.2 million commonlaw spouses,” while Québec solidaire urged the government to overhaul the Civil Code.
“Children born of a free union should be able to count on the capacity of their parents to bring them up them in a favourable context,” said Françoise David, Québec solidaire MNA for Gouin. “At the same time, lawmakers should preserve the freedom of Quebec men and women to choose to marry or not.”