Case information

Family law – Common law spouses – Separation – Family assets – What analytical framework should be used to establish the date of separation for “common law” relationships in Canada? – What evidence is required to show when a “marriage-like” relationship ends? – Whether the current definition and legal framework derived from the Molodowich v. Penttinen factors appropriately recognizes the diversity of family structures and modern relationships in Canada.

Case summaries are prepared by the Office of the Registrar of the Supreme Court of Canada (Law Branch). Please note that summaries are not provided to the Judges of the Court. They are placed on the Court file and website for information purposes only.

Mr. Castelli filed a notice of family claim seeking equal division of family property. The issue at trial was whether the claim was brought within the two-year time limit set out in s. 198(2)(b) of the Family Law Act, S.B.C. 2011, c. 25. Mr. Castelli and Ms. Paton agreed that they were, at least at one time, spouses under the Family Law Act. However, the parties disagreed on the nature of the relationship as of 2016. Mr. Castelli’s position was that the marriage-like relationship continued until April 2022, while Ms. Paton’s was that it ended in the fall of 2018, if not earlier.

The Supreme Court of British Columbia held that Mr. Castelli’s claim was statute-barred since the marriage-like relationship ended, at the latest, in October 2018. The British Columbia Court of Appeal unanimously dismissed Mr. Castelli’s appeal. It held that while the trial judge erred in focussing on the question of when the marriage-like relationship ended to determine when the time limit set out in s. 198(2)(b) began to run rather than on the date of separation as required by the Family Law Act, the findings of fact were sufficient to establish that the claim was brought well-beyond the limitation.