Ottawa Divorce .com Forums

Ottawa Divorce .com Forums (http://www.ottawadivorce.com/forum/)
-   Divorce & Family Law (http://www.ottawadivorce.com/forum/f3/)
-   -   Unjust Enrichment Claims - Game Changer (http://www.ottawadivorce.com/forum/f3/unjust-enrichment-claims-game-changer-17351/)

chapter2 04-01-2014 10:50 AM

Unjust Enrichment Claims - Game Changer
 
A good read.
To determine whether the parties have, in fact, been engaged in a joint family venture, the particular circumstances of each particular relationship must be taken into account. This is a question of fact and must be assessed by having regard to all of the relevant circumstances, including factors relating to mutual effort, economic integration, actual intent and priority of the family. The pooling of effort and team work, the decision to have and raise children together, and the length of the relationship may all point towards the extent to which the parties have formed a true partnership and jointly worked towards important mutual goals. The use of parties’ funds entirely for family purposes or where one spouse takes on all, or a greater proportion, of the domestic labour, freeing the other spouse from those responsibilities and enabling him or her to pursue activities in the paid workforce, may also indicate a pooling of resources. The more extensive the integration of the couple’s finances, economic interests and economic wellbeing, the more likely it is that they have engaged in a joint family venture. The actual intentions of the parties, either express or inferred from their conduct, must be given considerable weight. Their conduct may show that they intended the domestic and professional spheres of their lives to be part of a larger, common venture, but may also conversely negate the existence of a joint family venture, or support the conclusion that particular assets were to be held independently. Another consideration is whether and to what extent the parties have given priority to the family in their decision making, and whether there has been detrimental reliance on the relationship, by one or both of the parties, for the sake of the family. This may occur where one party leaves the workforce for a period of time to raise children; relocates for the benefit of the other party’s career; foregoes career or educational advancement for the benefit of the family or relationship; or accepts underemployment in order to balance the financial and domestic needs of the family unit. The Supreme Court of Canada has annunciated a new interpretation of unjust enrichment arising from a set of facts that they label a "Joint Family Venture." It is suggested, whether the family is a married couple or a common-law couple, that if they have lived together for a fairly substantial period of time and during that time one spouse has accumulated greater wealth or more property than the other, the common law (or equity) is now interpreted to say there will be a remedy when one spouse has been "unjustly impoverished" by the termination of the relationship and the other spouse has been "unjustly enriched."<o:p</o<o:p</o

blinkandimgone 04-08-2014 09:45 PM

Opinions, please:

Would it be reasonable to say that two parties, with children, who cohabited for many years and then went on to legally marry meet the criteria for joint family venture as far as 'intentions'?

chapter2 04-10-2014 10:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by blinkandimgone (Post 168312)
Opinions, please:

Would it be reasonable to say that two parties, with children, who cohabited for many years and then went on to legally marry meet the criteria for joint family venture as far as 'intentions'?

My opinion would be yes. I was CL for 7 years, then married for 5 with two kids. I would say that was a joint family venture with intention.

blinkandimgone 04-10-2014 11:24 AM

Thank you C2!


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:48 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.2.0