BC common law changes

[lylaxh]

Hi, I'm sorry if this has been asked already, but I'm just wondering if the new BC family law changes would affect the family immigration process as in the new changes a couple has to live together for 2 years instead of 1?

Many thanks for any help.

 

[Rob_TO]

Hi, I'm sorry if this has been asked already, but I'm just wondering if the new BC family law changes would affect the family immigration process as in the new changes a couple has to live together for 2 years instead of 1?

Many thanks for any help.

No. The common-law rule for CIC and PR purposes, will always be 1-year continuous cohabitation. This is a worldwide standard and is true no matter what province or country the application is from.

 

[truesmile]

The one-year of cohabitation to become "common-law" in BC has NOT changed. What has changed is... after "two years" of cohabitation you are at that point now considered "MARRIED", setting aside your previous common-law status.

 

[Rob_TO]

after "two years" of cohabitation you are at that point now considered "MARRIED", setting aside your previous common-law status.

\

Interesting rule. Though according to CIC, you would most likely still continue to apply as common-law even if considered "married" in BC due simply to 2-years living together, since there will be no wedding certificate, no wedding ceremony etc etc.

 

[truesmile]

Hmmm, so let's see... forms that ask for marital status will now look like:

Please indicate your marital status below, check ALL that apply:
Single: __
Divorced: __
Non-certificate Divorce (by virtue of leaving BC): __
Separated: __
Common-law provincially: __
Common-law federally: __
Married provincially: __
Married federally: __

I'd like to be the first to throw this one in the government's face, "Which do you want? You can't have it both ways!"

 

[lylaxh]

Thanks everyone for replies! I was wondering as if it had to be two years then what should people that are gonna apply do?! but I think CIC still put one year on their website yes. The changes of BC family law are very intriguing though, not sure if it will affect the immigration process at all...

 

[truesmile]

None whatsoever! Even in BC, you are "still" common-law after ONE year of cohabitation.

 

[lylaxh]

Haha! I really do wonder why people don't get to just be common laws per se without having to be considered married. It seems that the Canadian gov is *encouraging* people to take responsibilities!

Hmmm, so let's see... forms that ask for marital status will now look like:

Please indicate your marital status below, check ALL that apply:
Single: __
Divorced: __
Non-certificate Divorce (by virtue of leaving BC): __
Separated: __
Common-law provincially: __
Common-law federally: __
Married provincially: __
Married federally: __

I'd like to be the first to throw this one in the government's face, "Which do you want? You can't have it both ways!"

 

[Harju]

The changes in BC do not mean you are considered "married". You are still common-law but the new Family Law Act applies to the relationship and you have the exact same rights, liabilities, responsibilities etc. as a couple in a legal marriage.

Each province had/has separate legislation. For example, in Alberta they have the Matrimonial Property Act (for marriages) and the Adult Interdependent Relationship Act (for common-law). The rights and responsibilities under each Act are not the same. BC has implemented new legislation to make the same rights apply to each type of relationship.

You cannot assume that CIC's definition of common-law applies to everything. You need to look at the relevant legislation and industry practice. For example:
- For Canadian income taxes it is one year (or if you have a child)
- For family law as described above it is two or three years depending on the province
- For our car insurance, to get a married discount, it was three years
- To be a "spouse" for our pension benefits, I think it was two years.

Overall for legitimate common-law couples it should make no difference but for those who are using the common-law stream to extend the relationship without the obligations of marriage they need to think twice about what they are doing.