BC Spousal Support Time Limits Are Tricky
On spousal support time limits, our lawyer recently argued a precedent setting case in the BC court of appeal. MacLean Law won on behalf of her client at trial on the spousal support time limits argument but the BC Court of Appeal sent it back for a determination on whether the parties lived in a marriage like relationship for purposes of deciding entitlement to spousal support and property division after saying they could not tell if the wife was entitled to either.
These marriage like relationship spousal and property division cases require a highly skilled and specialized approach. Whether you are in a marriage like relationship or not and for how long has huge implication. Shouldn’t you hire an award winning lawyer such as MacLean Law’s legal team who was once again rated as Vancouver’s top family law firm by Top Choice Awards? Call us now at 1-877-602-9900 to meet with us in Vancouver, Surrey, Fort St. John or Kelowna.
The case points out two key time limits for spousal support. Spousal support time limits require a spouse to sue within 2 years of separation in a marriage like relationship unlike a married spouse who faces no such time limit. If you miss the Spousal support time limits you lose out entirely so hiring a top rated lawyer such as Vancouver’s top family law firm for 2016 in Vancouver is key. A second spousal support time limits issue relates to common law spouse’s without children needed to live in a marriage relationship for OVER 2 years. BUT if a child is born of the relationship no 2 year time limit applies BUT you must still be in a marriage like relationship such that a child born of a one night stand wouldn’t enable a spouse to get spousal support But they would of course receive child support.
What Are The Spousal Support Time Limits In BC?
In Matteucci v. Greenberg 2016 BCCA 116 the court decided as follows:
[50] The British Columbia Supreme Court has repeatedly held that a party may claim under the FLA for spousal support resulting from a marriage-like relationship that ended prior to the FLA coming into force: O. (A.P.) v. A. (A.A.), 2014 BCSC 1567 at para. 79; R. (L.J.) v. R. (S.W.), 2013 BCSC 1344 at para. 37; Walburger v. Lindsay, 2015 BCSC 341 at para. 4; Jaszczewska v. Kostanski, 2015 BCSC 727; Williams v. Killey, 2014 BCSC 1846; Trytten-Bradley v. Buckley, 2014 BCSC 2257 at para. 20. The conclusion I have arrived at is consistent with those decisions.
[51] For these reasons I would not apply the reasoning in Ciecierski to this legislation. It is immaterial whether that is based on arguments that a right had not vested or the presumption against interfering with vested rights is rebutted. In all cases it is founded on an interpretation of the FLA. The limitation defence which might apply is that under the FLA. It can only apply if the marriage-like relationship ended more than two years prior to the claim.
[52] In the result, in my opinion the court below should have considered Ms. Greenberg’s claim for spousal support under the FLA. Because the trial judge did not determine whether there was a marriage-like relationship, or the period of its duration, it is not possible to determine if Ms. Greenberg qualifies as a spouse under s. 3(1)(b)(i), i.e., whether the duration of the relationship was two years. However, under s. 3(1)(b)(ii), she clearly qualifies as a spouse for the purpose of spousal support because she had a child with Mr. Matteucci. Nevertheless, given that Ms. Greenberg had two years from the date of separation to make her claim (s. 198(2)(b)) and that the length of time the spouses lived together is a factor to consider in determining the amount and duration of spousal support (s. 162), the length of the marriage-like relationship should have been determined.
Stay tuned for the ultimate result. In the meantime common law spouse’s who separate better pay attention to the time limits or they could be out off luck to obtain spousal support.
by Lorne N. MacLean, QC
