Common-law breakup: What will happen to the house if owned by parents.

[ravencroft]

The legal term you should be looking into is called "Unjust Enrichment". Google it for Ontario and read it thoroughly, and if necessary, go over it with a lawyer if you can spare the expense.
Here's but one of many links out there, and an excerpt from that page: https://www.familylawhelp.ca/common-law-division/

Constructive Trust / Unjust Enrichment

If you have been in a long common-law relationship and you feel that you have contributed extensively to the value of a certain asset that belongs to your partner (a home in which you lived, or a pension or savings account, for example), and that it is therefore unjust for your spouse to retain the full value of that asset, you are not entirely without recourse.

While, as indicated, a common-law partner is not automatically entitled to equal property division or to share the family home, you can make a claim for a constructive trust, to remedy unjust enrichment. In order to show unjust enrichment, you will have to show that you and your partner were engaged in a joint family venture, and that your partner is retaining a disproportionate share of the profits of that venture. A constructive trust gives the beneficiary a right to property in a particular asset, such as the matrimonial home. A court can also award a monetary remedy for unjust enrichment, if one partner can prove the other is unjustly retaining a disproportionate share of the profits of a joint family venture, but there is no link between the one partner’s contributions and a specific asset or piece of property.

Litigation in this area can be difficult and complex, and it is not easy to predict when courts will find a joint family venture and unjust enrichment, and what award they will give. The claims are necessarily very fact specific. If you want to pursue this type of claim, you should consider retaining a lawyer experienced and knowledgeable in this area.

In order to determine whether you and your partner were part of a “joint family venture,” the courts may consider a variety of fact-specific questions, such as:

• Was there was a pooling of resources (for example, did both parties invest money in a business or home)?
• Did the parties have children together?
• Were decisions made jointly about children or finances?
• How integrated were the parties’ accounts? Did they share joint bank accounts or credit cards?
• Did the parties see their relationship as equivalent to marriage?
• Did they identify themselves as common-law, for example on tax returns?
• In general, did the partners prioritize the family as a unit over themselves individually? Did they make decisions, such as to move or change jobs, for the sake of the family?

The longer a relationship, the more children there are together, and the more integrated the finances, the more likely a court will find a joint family venture.

If a joint family venture is established, you will then need to show that your partner profited unfairly from that venture, and is walking away from the relationship with a disproportionate percentage of the profits. More specifically, you must establish that you have, through your contributions of money or labour, enriched your spouse; that you suffered a corresponding deprivation in making those contributions; and that there is no legal reason for the enrichment (such as a contract, a gift, or inheritance).

As indicated, your labour may be linked directly to the increased value of a specific property item: for example, perhaps you worked extensively to renovate a home that your partner owned, thereby greatly increasing the value of that home. In that case, courts may find a constructive trust, and as remedy for the unjust enrichment, award your ownership of a percentage of that property that corresponds to your contribution. In other situations, your work may be tied more broadly to the family venture, rather than a specific piece of property: for example, perhaps you took on household or child-rearing tasks in order to enable your partner to work or build a business, and the money from that business is not shared. In that case, the courts could award a share of the increase in value of the business over the course of the relationship.

Basically, as I interpret it, for Common Law you're only truly screwed if either:
a) You knock her up
b) You joined all your accounts and didn't maintain a clear paper trail of who bought/paid for what
c) You allowed her to pay more than her fair share for some thing(s). EVERYONE has to pay to live somewhere, so her paying rent does not necessarily mean she gets to own a percentage / anything of yours... After all, she's an adult and would have had to pay rent to live somewhere. However if you allowed her to pay directly into your mortgage then you could have a problem as that could be seen as investing in the property...

I'm glad I got a Cohabitation Agreement / Marriage Contract before I "settled down": by tackling this issue BEFORE acquiring property together, it made things much more transparent and clear for all parties what was happening, and what will happen upon our separation (knock on wood). I can't stress this enough folks: get one and ONLY ONE joint chequing account for 50/50 shared common expenses, and keep the rest of your finances separate. It may not save you from spousal support or separation costs, but it will make the accounting a heck of a lot easier and more likely to fall in your favor if you were transparent from Day One.

 

[mandrill]

Call the Law Society of Ontario. Ask for "lawyer referral". Get 1/2 hour free legal advice from a family law lawyer.

Better than getting advice on terb.