Many couples in Ontario choose to live together without getting married. However, common-law partners do not automatically have the same legal rights and protections as married spouses. These differences can become particularly important when a relationship ends or a partner passes away.
Understanding what common-law status means in Ontario, how property rights differ from those of married spouses, and when support may be available can help you protect your interests.
When Are You Considered Common Law in Ontario?
Ontario does not have one universal definition of a common-law relationship for every legal purpose. The applicable definition depends on the issue involved.
Under section 29 of Ontario’s Family Law Act, a person may qualify as a spouse for spousal support purposes if they:
- Have cohabited continuously for at least three years in a relationship of some permanence; or
- Are in a relationship of some permanence and are the parents of a child together.
This definition applies to spousal support claims under the Act. Other laws, including federal tax legislation, may use different criteria for recognizing common-law partners.
Importantly, living together for a certain length of time does not automatically give common-law partners the same property rights as married spouses. Property division, inheritance, and rights to a shared home are governed by different legal rules.
The Biggest Difference: Property Rights
One of the most significant differences between married and common-law couples in Ontario concerns property.
Under Ontario’s Family Law Act, married spouses generally have a right to an equalization calculation when their marriage ends. This process compares each spouse’s net family property and determines whether an equalization payment is owed. It does not mean that every asset is automatically divided equally or jointly owned.
Common-law partners do not have an automatic right to equalization under this legislation, regardless of how long they have lived together.
Generally, legal ownership is an important starting point: property owned by one partner does not automatically become jointly owned because of the relationship. However, a partner who contributed financially or otherwise to property owned by the other may have a legal claim, depending on the circumstances.
Unjust Enrichment
A common-law partner may bring an unjust enrichment claim if they can establish that:
- Their partner received a benefit.
- They suffered a corresponding deprivation.
- There is no legally sufficient reason for the benefit and deprivation.
A benefit might include financial contributions, unpaid work in a partner’s business, or other contributions that helped the other partner accumulate wealth. The court considers the evidence and the circumstances of the relationship.
Constructive Trusts and Monetary Awards
If unjust enrichment is established, a court may award monetary compensation. In some cases, it may grant a constructive trust, which gives the claimant a beneficial interest in specific property.
A constructive trust is not automatic. The claimant must establish the legal requirements, including a sufficiently substantial and direct connection between the contributions and the property in question. A monetary award is often the appropriate remedy.
A resulting trust may also be relevant in certain circumstances, such as where one person contributed to the purchase of property held in the other person’s name and the evidence supports an inference that the property was not intended as a gift.
The appropriate remedy depends on the evidence and the legal principles applicable to the claim.
What Is a Joint Family Venture?
In some cases, courts recognize that partners operated as an integrated economic and domestic unit, making contributions toward shared goals and building wealth together. This may be relevant to an unjust enrichment claim involving a joint family venture.
The Supreme Court of Canada identified four factors that may assist in assessing whether a joint family venture existed:
- Mutual effort.
- Economic integration.
- Actual intention.
- Whether the family took priority in the parties’ decisions.
These factors are considered together with the circumstances as a whole. There is no automatic entitlement to half of a partner’s property simply because a couple had a long relationship or shared household responsibilities.
What Does Mullin v. Sherlock Tell Us?
In Mullin v. Sherlock, 2025 ONCA 510, the Ontario Court of Appeal upheld a $3 million monetary award for unjust enrichment arising from a joint family venture, as well as a lump-sum spousal support award.
The parties began living together in 2000 and married in 2012 before separating in 2013. During their relationship, one partner made significant contributions to the other’s business, including working without compensation and sacrificing her own career opportunities.
The case illustrates that contributions to a relationship may extend beyond direct financial payments. Unpaid work, career sacrifices, and efforts that help build a partner’s business or wealth may be relevant to an unjust enrichment claim.
However, the decision does not establish that common-law partners are automatically entitled to an equal share of a business or other property. The outcome depended on the specific evidence and legal findings in that case.
What About the Matrimonial Home?
Ontario’s special statutory protections for a matrimonial home generally apply to married spouses, not common-law partners.
Under Part II of the Family Law Act, married spouses may have rights relating to possession of the matrimonial home, even where only one spouse owns it. Common-law partners do not automatically receive these same rights simply because they live together.
For common-law partners, ownership, any agreement between the parties, and possible property claims are important considerations. Depending on the circumstances, a partner may also seek other remedies available under the law.
For example, a person who has contributed to a home owned by their partner may have a potential unjust enrichment claim. However, a claim to an interest in the property must be established; it does not arise automatically from cohabitation.
If there are safety concerns, separate legal protections may also be available depending on the circumstances.
Can Common-Law Partners Claim Spousal Support?
Yes. A common-law partner may qualify for spousal support under Ontario law if the applicable eligibility requirements are met.
Under section 29 of the Family Law Act, this generally means having cohabited continuously for at least three years, or being in a relationship of some permanence and being the parents of a child together.
Eligibility does not guarantee that support will be awarded. The court considers the parties’ circumstances, including their financial means and needs, the roles they assumed during the relationship, any economic disadvantages arising from the relationship, and their ability to become self-sufficient.
Spousal support may be compensatory, non-compensatory, or both, depending on the circumstances. The amount and duration are determined by applying the relevant legal principles.
Parenting and Child Support
Parents’ rights and obligations concerning their children do not depend solely on whether they were married.
When a common-law relationship ends, parenting arrangements may need to address decision-making responsibility, parenting time, and the child’s best interests. These arrangements are not automatically divided equally between parents; they depend on the applicable law and the child’s circumstances.
Child support may also be payable regardless of whether the parents were married. The amount is generally determined under the applicable child support guidelines, taking into account factors such as the parents’ incomes and the parenting arrangement.
What Happens If a Common-Law Partner Dies?
Common-law partners should not assume they automatically inherit from each other.
Under Ontario’s intestacy rules, a common-law partner generally does not receive the same automatic inheritance rights as a legally married spouse when someone dies without a valid will.
Depending on the circumstances, a surviving common-law partner may have other legal options, including a claim for dependant support against the estate if the legal requirements are met. The availability and outcome of such a claim depend on the facts and applicable law.
To help protect each other, partners should consider making or updating their wills and reviewing beneficiary designations for assets such as life insurance, registered accounts, and pensions. The appropriate steps depend on the assets and the terms of any existing documents.
How Can You Protect Yourself in a Common-Law Relationship?
There are practical steps couples can take to clarify their rights and reduce the risk of disputes.
- Consider a cohabitation agreement. This can set out how property, debts, and financial responsibilities will be addressed during the relationship and if it ends.
- Keep records of contributions. Documents showing payments toward a home, renovations, shared expenses, or a partner’s business may be relevant if a dispute arises.
- Understand property ownership. Review whose name is on title and whether an agreement or other legal arrangement addresses ownership.
- Review your estate planning. Make sure your will and beneficiary designations reflect your wishes.
- Get legal advice before signing an agreement. Understanding the legal consequences of an agreement can help prevent misunderstandings later.
A cohabitation agreement must meet the applicable legal requirements to be enforceable as a domestic contract under Ontario’s Family Law Act. Generally, it must be in writing, signed by the parties, and witnessed.
If a relationship ends, a separation agreement may help resolve outstanding issues, including property claims, support, and parenting arrangements. Where the parties cannot reach an agreement, negotiation, mediation, or court proceedings may be necessary.
Key Takeaways
- Ontario’s common-law definitions vary depending on the legal issue.
- Common-law partners do not automatically have the same property equalization rights as married spouses.
- Unjust enrichment and trust claims may be available, but they must be established based on the evidence.
- Common-law partners may qualify for spousal support if the legal requirements are met.
- Parenting and child support issues are not determined solely by marital status.
- Common-law partners generally do not automatically inherit from each other under Ontario’s intestacy rules.
- Cohabitation agreements, wills, and clear financial records can help protect your interests.
Frequently Asked Questions
For spousal support purposes under Ontario’s Family Law Act, the general threshold is three years of continuous cohabitation in a relationship of some permanence. A different rule applies where the partners are in a relationship of some permanence and are the parents of a child together. Other laws may use different definitions.
No. Common-law partners do not automatically receive half of a home or other property. A partner may have a legal claim depending on ownership, contributions, agreements, and other circumstances.
Yes, if the applicable eligibility requirements are met. Whether support is awarded, and in what amount and for how long, depends on the circumstances.
Generally, no. Under Ontario’s intestacy rules, common-law partners do not have the same automatic inheritance rights as married spouses. A will and appropriate beneficiary designations can help clarify a person’s wishes.
A cohabitation agreement can help clarify property rights, financial responsibilities, and what may happen if the relationship ends. Each partner should understand the agreement’s legal implications before signing.
