CPABC in Focus November/December 2013 | Page 25

and found that the parties were not spouses as defined by either the old or new legislation. In making his decision, the justice noted that: 1) The parties had not mingled their finances; 2) The parties never shared legal rights to their accommodation; 3) Neither party had surrendered economic independence to the other so as to become dependent on the other; and 4) Even though the parties had shared living accommodations, they had not committed to a permanent relationship. According to the court, if such a commitment had existed, it would have manifested itself in 2010, with the male party providing care for the female party while she recovered from her stroke. Considerations and tips The expanded definition of spouse under the new provincial Act could give rise to an increase in the number of litigious claims made by cohabitating partners in British Columbia. Accordingly, here are four practical tips to consider when dealing with owner/ manager clients who are contemplating cohabitation, marriage, separation, or divorce (note: most of these tips can also be used for married clients as well). 1. Update your engagement letter, as your obligation of confidentiality may not preclude being compelled by lawful authority to disclose your client’s financial information. In your engagement letters, consider adding terms which provide that in the event that you are compelled by a court order to provide any documentation or evidence in “divorce” proceedings, you will be compensated accordingly. 2. Alert your client to the fact that if a claim is ever made against their business or personal assets by their cohabitating partner, aka “spouse,” you could be precluded from providing any assistance if you have also been providing professional services to their spouse. If your client has concerns about this possibility, be sure to avoid—to the fullest extent possible—including any services for their spouse as part of your overall retainer. 3. Advise your client to rethink the use of excluded property. Under the FLA, a spouse’s excluded property will consist of property owned by the spouse at the date the parties began to cohabitate. It will also consist of certain property acquired after the start date of cohabitation, such as: gifts and inheritances; certain kinds of settlements; court awards and insurance proceeds; property held in trust for the spouse; and property acquired with excluded property (excluded property is presumed to remain the property of the owning spouse). Example: Inheritances. Instead of using an inheritance to pay down the mortgage on the family home, which normally might make sense, your client may want to consider paying off debts that are strictly personal. Alternatively, you could advise them to deposit the funds into separate investments (such as a personal TFSA or RRSP account, as opposed to a spousal account)—especially if the ɔ