Divorce LAWYER

There is no simple answer to this question other than “talk to your lawyer first”. The facts of each family law case are unique and it is possible for you to prejudice the rights and claims you may have against your spouse if you vacate the matrimonial home without having first addressed other issues such as support and property division. It is important to note that as a married spouse, regardless of whether or not the title of the home is registered under your name, you are entitled to occupy (possess) the matrimonial home, unless there is a court order or a written agreement for exclusive possession of the matrimonial home in favour of one of the spouses. Vacating the matrimonial home too early will make it very difficult for you to try to move back there, even if the circumstances require you to do so. It will affect parenting arrangements and the children’s (if any) primary residence. Furthermore, it can affect your obligations to pay support or your entitlement to receive support from your spouse. On the other hand, there are compelling reasons for one spouse to vacate the matrimonial home soon after separation and that is to reduce conflict between the parties and (if applicable) to reduce the risk of emotional harm to the children. In cases with a history of domestic abuse, there may also be safety concerns that would compel one spouse to vacate the matrimonial home immediately. In short, this decision requires a cost-benefit analysis that is fact-specific. Given the multiple layers of issues that arise from the breakdown of a domestic relationship, it is best to seek the advice of a family law lawyer to understand what is the best decision for you after considering all the different angles of this decision and understanding how your other rights and obligations may be affected.

No! Unless there is an agreement between the parties with respect to a “right of first refusal”, one spouse does not have a ‘special right’ to purchase the other spouse’s interest in the matrimonial home. In fact, the courts in Ontario have repeatedly recognized that each spouse is entitled to receive fair market value for his or her interest in the matrimonial home once it is ordered to be sold. The Ontario Court of Appeal has stated that when selling the matrimonial home after separation, both spouses/owners are free to bid at the sale but neither party can be given a right of first refusal. Therefore, unless you consent to it, your spouse has no special right to purchase your share in the matrimonial home.

When spouses are discussing selling and dividing their assets after separation, the proposal of one spouse buying the interest of the other spouse in a jointly-held property comes up frequently. The right of first refusal–which means giving your spouse the right to purchase your interest in a matrimonial home (or other property), before any other potential buyer–is a right that can only be obtained through consent. Therefore, before you agree to sell your share to your spouse, you should be aware of a few risks that can affect you. Quantifying the economic value of your home may be difficult and you may hear the other side saying: “appraisal reports are too low”, “real estate opinions are too high” and so on. A common practice for parties in such scenario is to list their home on MLS for sale and the spouse with the right of first refusal would then meet or beat the best offer. The problem with this practice is that ‘the right of first refusal’ has to be disclosed to the potential buyers, which then distorts the market: it removes the need for that spouse to compete with the market and it discourages other interested buyers. Also, if the spouse who has been granted the right of first refusal is living in the matrimonial home, he or she may make less of an effort to maintain the property in a condition that would increase its resale value. Before agreeing to grant the right of first refusal to your spouse, a right that only you–and not the court–can give him or her, make sure that you speak with a family law lawyer, who can advise you on what would be the best, comprehensive deal you can make, taking into account all of the other financial claims and obligations that pertain to your case.

Co-parenting after a separation can be challenging. One question we often get from parents is whether they can control who their children interact with while under the other parent’s care. Putting your child in the care of another can be daunting, but it is important to trust that your co-parent has your children’s best interests in mind. Legally, as long as the children are safe, parents do not have control over their children’s activities when they’re with the other parent.

Determining a parenting schedule should be based on what is best for the children (Divorce Act, section 16). For example, strong ties with extended family enrich the lives of children and should be preserved. Furthermore, without an agreement or court order to the contrary, parents are free to introduce children to new partners. It is important that parents maintain open lines of communication with each other to ensure such introductions are done respectfully and appropriately.

Post-separation parents must also collaborate on crucial decisions affecting their children, such as education and healthcare. When disagreements about major decisions arise, options like mediation, negotiation, or litigation are available — and speaking to a lawyer can offer guidance. It’s important to remember, though, that day-to-day care remains the responsibility of the scheduled parent.

Trust and open communication are the cornerstones of successful post-separation parenting. Embracing these values allows children to sustain positive relationships with both parents, despite a changing family dynamic.