FamilyCounsel.ca
DivorceArbitrations.ca
Need a decision, but clients don't have the resources or time to wait for a trial?
Consider Family Law Arbitration
(website with advantages, FAQs,
and directory of arbitrators)

What changes should be made to family law?

These proposals let family law lawyers discuss and vote on what changes they think should be made to the law or court procedures. The results can be viewed and shared with legislators and the Courts. The proposals put forth are written by member lawyers, and do not necessarily reflect the views of this website or its administrators. You can view more proposals or make a proposal yourself.


Proposal: Amend the Family Property Act to confirm that those contemplating becoming AIPs can enter into agreements, and rescind s 37(5)
Property - Nov 23, 2023

90% in favour out of 30 votes

Ken Proudman Executive
 view Arbitrator profile
  BARR LLP
   Edmonton, Alberta


The old Matrimonial Property Act's section 37(2) contained a term stating that individuals could enter into agreements contracting out of the MPA in contemplation of marriage. This was replaced by another term in the FPA, and there is no longer any reference to contemplation of marriage. Section 37(1) reads "...if, in respect of that property, the spouses or adult interdependent partners have entered into a subsisting written agreement with each other..." While I would hope that would be interpreted to only refer to their subsequent status, there's a risk that could be interpreted to mean that they need to be spouses or AIPs to enter into agreements.

Even more dangerous is section 37(5), which reads "An agreement under subsection (1) that is entered into by a person purporting to be an adult interdependent partner, knowing or in circumstances in which the person ought to have known that there was no valid adult interdependent relationship within the meaning of the Adult Interdependent Relationships Act, is unenforceable by that person." It's inevitable that childless couples will sign agreements calling them AIPs before the three year mark, without realizing that they've entered into an invalid agreement. It will also inevitably lead to much litigation where people dispute their AIP status. I don't see any benefit from leaving this provision in, if people are using agreements for fraudulent purposes such as obtaining financing then there are other remedies.


5 5 months ago - edited 5 months ago

Dawn Nelson
  Dawn L. Nelson, Barrister & Solicitor
   Edmonton, Alberta


The harm you imagine is saved by the Adult Interdependent Relationships Act sections 3(1)(b) and s. 7.

1 3 months ago

You must log in or sign up to reply to conversations.











© 2016 to 2024 Kenneth J. Proudman. DISCLAIMER: The tools, documents, and other information herein are not legal, tax, or accounting advice or opinions. This website contains content and files submitted by third parties, to which you download or view at your own risk. By using this website, you agree to release Kenneth J. Proudman, BARR LLP, and Miller Boileau Family Law Group from all present and future claims and liability, including liability arising from any negligence.