Family law in Nova Scotia applies a distinct difference between common law relationships and marriage. While some provinces may allow common law, or cohabitation, to take on the rights and responsibilities of marriage after a certain period of time, this is not the case in Nova Scotia.
A common law relationship is simply the act of living together in a marriage-like relationship without actually being legally married. It does not require any kind of legal process to create a common law union. The definition of common law partnership also differs depending on the laws applied. For example, the Canada Pension Plan states that two people are in a common law relationship after a year of cohabitation. The Parenting and Support Act, on the other hand, requires two years of cohabitation before a relationship can be described as common law.
To get the most out of your initial consultation with a family lawyer at our Nova Scotia family law firm, it is important to prepare well.
When you are in the process of booking an initial consultation with one of our family lawyers, you will be asked to fill out an Initial Consultation Client Information Form, which allows the lawyer to review your circumstances in advance.
As tax season approaches, it is beneficial to be aware of what expenses you may be entitled to claim as deductions.
If you incurred legal fees for the purpose of collecting, receiving, or securing child support or spousal support, you can claim those legal fees as a deduction at line 221 of your income tax return. It’s important to note that only the receiving parent or spouse can claim their legal fees as a deduction.
The tax deductible legal fees may relate to collecting late support payments, establishing an amount for support payments, or efforts to vary support to a higher amount. Unfortunately, legal fees paid to get a separation or divorce, or to establish custody of or visitation arrangements for a child cannot be claimed at line 221.
Every January we review our clients’ accounts and determine the percentage of time and effort spent on their file that relates to their claims for child and/or spousal support. We then send our clients who qualify for a deduction, letters outlining our opinion of the percentage of their legal fees they are entitled to deduct. The client can provide their letter to CRA as a receipt.
We offer these letters free of charge to our clients because we believe that individuals and families should enjoy the maximum income and benefits available to them by law.
For more information about tax and family law please see “Tax Matters Toolkit for Clients”, a publication of the Canadian Bar Association, available at:
https://www.cba.org/CBAMediaLibrary/cba_na/PDFs/Sections/taxMattersToolkitClients_Eng.pdf
As tax season approaches, it is beneficial to be aware of what expenses you may be entitled to claim as deductions.
If you incurred legal fees for the purpose of collecting, receiving, or securing child support or spousal support, you can claim those legal fees as a deduction at line 221 of your income tax return. It’s important to note that only the receiving parent or spouse can claim their legal fees as a deduction.
The tax deductible legal fees may relate to collecting late support payments, establishing an amount for support payments, or efforts to vary support to a higher amount. Unfortunately, legal fees paid to get a separation or divorce, or to establish custody of or visitation arrangements for a child cannot be claimed at line 221.
Every January we review our clients’ accounts and determine the percentage of time and effort spent on their file that relates to their claims for child and/or spousal support. We then send our clients who qualify for a deduction letters outlining our opinion of the percentage of their legal fees they are entitled to deduct. The client can provide their letter to CRA as a receipt.
We offer these letters free of charge to our clients because we believe that individuals and families should enjoy the maximum income and benefits available to them through law.
Further information can be found on Canada Revenue Agency’s website: http://www.cra-arc.gc.ca/tx/ndvdls/tpcs/ncm-tx/rtrn/cmpltng/ddctns/lns206-236/221/menu-eng.html.
Pets are very loved by their owners and often viewed as family members akin to children. However, the law does not treat family pets the same as it does children for the purposes of custody and access.
For children, the court is always guided by the “best interests” of the child. In contrast, under the law, animals are considered personal property. As such, disputes between people claiming the right to possess an animal are determined on the basis of ownership, or agreements as to ownership, rather than considerations of “the best interests” of the pet.
That being said, the law in jurisdictions outside of Nova Scotia may be starting to recognize a more nuanced approach for addressing possession of pets in separations involving married couples. Courts are able to treat a pet’s status as family or matrimonial property to ground an order for possession of, or essentially access to, that pet by a former spouse.
With respect to common law couples, in the recent Nova Scotian decision of MacDonald v. Pearl, 2017 NSSM, Adjudicator Richardson noted: “…the fact that people in a common law relationship may view their pets as akin to children gives rise to the possibility of agreements—whether express or implied—as to what might happen to the animals in the event the people separate”.
In MacDonald v. Pearl, the Small Claims Court addressed a dispute over two Yorkshire Terriers, brothers Henry and Daniel. Essentially the court determined that Henry was purchased by Mr. MacDonald as a companion for Ms. Pearl because Ms. Pearl was lonely. Accordingly, Ms. Pearl was awarded Henry.
The other dog, Henry’s brother Daniel, was purchased by Mr. MacDonald because Mr. MacDonald did not want to leave Daniel, the last of the litter, alone. Mr. MacDonald was awarded Daniel, which somewhat ironically separated the siblings.
In a case involving sibling children, the court will heavily consider the children’s bond to each other when analyzing their best interests. As indicated above, because pets are classified as personal property, the court is not able to consider their best interests, and so the court cannot consider the relationship between animal siblings.
With the state of the law as it is now, working out an agreement on pet ownership or access directly between the parties is the best way to properly recognize the love and companionship people share with their pets, as well as what arrangements are in the pet’s best interests after separation.
On May 26th, 2017, the provisions of the Parenting and Support Act will come into effect throughout Nova Scotia. This is a new piece of legislation that will update and replace the Maintenance and Custody Act. This Act governs family law issues relating to child custody, and child and spousal support for unmarried couples or married couples who have separated but have not initiated divorce proceedings.
The Parenting and Support Act maintains some of the provisions of the Maintenance and Custody Act. There are a number of key updates and additions that affect law in Nova Scotia. These changes are shown in the wording used by the Act relating to parenting. For instance, the definition of who qualifies as a “parent” or “spouse” has been broadened, and terms such as “access” have been replaced with “interaction” and “parenting time.” The Act has also adopted more gender neutral language throughout.
The significant change is that the Parenting and Support Act now includes provisions on child mobility and relocation. The Act imposes presumptions in favour of certain parents who wish to move with their child, or those who oppose the move. These presumptions are based on the custodial and parenting arrangements in place at the time.
If the parent who wants to relocate with the child is considered the child’s primary caregiver (or the parent the child lives with for the majority of the time), then the other parent would have the burden to show the court that the proposed move would not be in the best interests of the child. If parenting time is shared between the parents, then both parties need to show the Court what is best for the child.
The new Parenting and Support Act sets out a list of factors for the court to consider when seeking to determine what would be in the best interests of the child in relocation cases.
Cases concerning mobility and relocation are some of the most difficult family law issues that come before the court. The Family Law Lawyers at Lenehan Musgrave LLP are knowledgeable in these new provisions of the Parenting and Support Act, and experienced in child mobility and relocation cases. Please contact us at: http://www.lenehanmusgravelaw.ca/consultation/ or 902-466-2200 for more information or to schedule an initial consultation.
As tax season approaches, it is beneficial to be aware of what expenses you may be entitled to claim as deductions.
If you incurred legal fees for the purpose of collecting, receiving, or securing child support or spousal support, you can claim those legal fees as a deduction at line 221 of your income tax return. It is important to note that only the receiving parent or spouse can claim their legal fees as a deduction.
The tax deductible legal fees may relate to collecting late support payments, establishing an amount for support payments, or efforts to vary support to a higher amount.
Every January we review our clients’ accounts and determine the percentage of time and effort spent on their file that relates to their claims for child and/or spousal support. We then send our clients who qualify for a deduction letters outlining our opinion on the percentage of their legal fees they are entitled to deduct. The client can provide their letter to CRA as a receipt.
We offer these letters free of charge to our clients because we believe that individuals and families should enjoy the maximum income and benefits available to them through law.
Further information can be found on Canada Revenue Agency’s website: http://www.cra-arc.gc.ca/tx/ndvdls/tpcs/ncm-tx/rtrn/cmpltng/ddctns/lns206-236/221/menu-eng.html.
The living hourly wage is the rate necessary to pay for the basic needs of a family of four with two working parents. This amount is calculated by the Centre for Canadian Policy Alternatives.
For 2016, the living hourly wage in Halifax is $19.17 for a 35 hour work week, which amounts to $34,889.00 annually per full-time working parent. The current living hourly wage is nearly a dollar lower than it was in 2015 thanks to the Canada Child Benefit introduced by the federal Liberal government.
At Lenehan Musgrave we believe all employees are entitled to earn a living wage and that all families should benefit accordingly. These beliefs are reflected most strongly in our staff compensation packages and in our unique approach to providing legal services.
We recognize how difficult it can be for many individuals to earn a living wage in our current economy, so we offer limited scope legal services for clients and families on tight budgets. One such limited scope service that we offer a flat rate fee for are applications for child support: http://www.lenehanmusgravelaw.ca/set-price/
We also offer flexible hours for appointments on request so that our clients can meet with us without having to sacrifice income they could be earning.
Recent case law in Nova Scotia emphasizes that in Canada, spousal support should not be automatically prolonged solely based on one spouse's failure to achieve self-sufficiency.
Judges frequently acknowledge that society as a whole has a responsibility to individuals who are unable to work that must be balanced with the responsibility of the supporting spouse. The Court looks to find a balance between one spouse’s need for support and the other spouse’s need for certainty with respect to their obligations and right to have a “clean break”.
The concept of a "clean break" emphasizes the idea of finality and closure after a divorce. It is based on the understanding that both parties should be able to move forward without lingering financial ties to one another. This principle acknowledges the emotional toll that ongoing financial obligations can have on individuals and seeks to provide them with a fresh start.
While society's obligation to support those in need is crucial, it is equally important to ensure that no one is unfairly burdened by endless financial responsibilities. A well-balanced approach, taking into account the circumstances of both parties, can help achieve a just and equitable resolution in divorce cases, allowing each individual to rebuild their lives with a sense of security and independence.
There has been reluctance from judges to order indefinite spousal support awards for disabled spouses in medium length marriages (6 to 19 years). However, cases where the receiving spouse is suffering from an ongoing disability typically result in longer-term spousal support awards than what is generally awarded to receiving spouses who have decent employment prospects.
The spousal support awards for disabled spouses are generally around the length of the marriage. This is the top end of the range for duration contemplated by the Spousal Support Advisory Guidelines for medium length marriages.
Like all spousal support orders, orders for disabled spouses can be varied if circumstances later change. For example, if the receiving spouse recovers and is able to return to his or her occupation or some other form of employment then support can be varied or terminated depending on all of the other circumstances. The support award could also be varied if the receiving spouse begins receiving CPP disability or other disability benefits.
In some disability cases, what is called “restructuring” can be applied. Essentially this where the quantum of spousal support is reduced but paid for a longer duration. The benefit with this approach is that in certain situations it can guarantee the receiving spouse some income until they can access CPP, a private pension, or Old Age Security at 65. Adopting the restructuring model, not only eases the financial burden on the paying spouse but also empowers the disabled spouse to transition towards financial independence gradually.
It is important to note that restructuring spousal support is not applicable in all cases and should be carefully considered in the context of each unique situation. Consulting with a qualified family law attorney is crucial to determine the feasibility and appropriateness of this approach based on the specific circumstances of the disabled spouse and the paying spouse.
Spousal support is one of the most complex aspects of a divorce or common law separation. The quantum and duration of the award depend heavily on the specific facts of each case. Whether you are the payor or payee, it is recommended that you discuss your case with a lawyer. The Divorce and Family Law Lawyers at Lenehan Musgrave LLP are experienced in spousal support applications. Please contact us or 902-466-2200 to schedule an initial consultation.
As family lawyers in 2024, we know that the composition of a household can take many different forms. When it comes to child custody and biological parents, things can get complex.
As lawyers who often get asked for consultations and to prepare legal documentation, clients often ask us about litigation cost awards in court cases. When a matter is taken to trial, the parties are asking a judge to make a determination of the issues on their behalf.
In many family law cases where there are children, a major objective is developing a parenting plan that meets the needs of the children.
