Department of Justice Canada
Symbol of the Government of Canada
Skip to content | Skip to institutional links

Common menu bar links

Breadcrumb trail

  1. Home
  2. Programs and Initiatives
  3. Supporting Families

Institutional links


family justice

The Department of Justice Canada works to reduce family violence in Canada. Learn more...

DIVORCE REFORM AND THE JOINT EXERCISE OF PARENTAL AUTHORITY THE QUEBEC CIVIL LAW PERSPECTIVE

ENDNOTES

  • [1] Parliament of Canada, For the Sake of the Children, Report of the Special Joint Committee on Child Custody and Access, Ottawa, December 1998.

  • [2] Government of Canada, Strategy for Reform, Government of Canada's Response to the Report of the Special Joint Committee on Child Custody and Access, Ottawa, May 1999.

  • [3] S.Q. 1969, c. 74, ss. 9 and 14:  "The court may also decide as to the custody, maintenance and education of the children…" Quoted by A. Mayrand, "La garde conjointe (autorité parentale conjointe) envisagée dans le contexte social et juridique actuel" in Formation permanente du Barreau du Québec, Droit et enfant, Cowansville : Les Éditions Yvon Blais, 1990, p. 22.

  • [4] Art. 192 C.C.Q.

  • [5] Art. 599 C.C.Q.

  • [6] Art. 14 C.C.Q.

  • [7] Art. 373(1) C.C.Q..

  • [8] Art. 194(2) and 603 C.C.Q.

  • [9] Art. 606 C.C.Q.

  • [10] Art. 197 C.C.Q.

  • [11] See the Supreme Court ruling in C.(G.) v. V.-F.(T.), [1987] 2 S.C.R. 244, 261.

  • [12] Art. 610 C.C.Q.

  • [13] Albert Mayrand defines custody as the right and obligation of a person (normally the father or mother) to house and keep a child near or to establish a home for the child elsewhere; A. Mayrand, "La garde conjointe (autorité parentale conjointe) envisagée dans le contexte social et juridique actuel," in Formation permanente du Barreau du Québec, Droit et enfant, Cowansville : Les Éditions Yvon Blais, 1990, p. 23.

  • [14] P.-A. Côté, "La Loi de 1985 sur le divorce et le droit civil," (1987) 47 Can. Bar Rev., 1187; M. Pratte, "La garde conjointe des enfants de familles désunies", (1988) 19 R.G.D. 525; R. Joyal, Précis de droit des jeunes, Vol. 1, 2nd edition, Cowansville : Les Éditions Yvon Blais Inc., 1994; and, more recently, M. Giroux, "Le partage des responsabilités parentales après une rupture : une matière à débat," (1998) 77 Can. Bar Rev., 354.

  • [15] A. Mayrand, loc. cit., p. 31.

  • [16] For example, Droit de la famille, (1993) R.J.Q. 1728 (C.A.); Droit de famille-120, (1984) C.A. 101; Droit de la famille-301, (1988) R.J.Q. 17 (C.A.).

  • [17] Droit de la famille-2471, (1996) R.D.F. 556 (C.S.); Droit de la famille-2233, (1995) R.D.F. 489 (C.S.).

  • [18] C.(G.) v. V.-F.(T.), [1987] 2 S.C.R. 244.

  • [19] See A. Mayrand, loc. cit., p. 33.

  • [20] Droit de la famille-3202, (1999) R.J.Q. 248 (C.S.).  Similarly, Droit de la famille-2384, (1996) R.J.Q. 912 (C.S.).

  • [21] See P. Rayle, "Le juge, l'enfant et ... le parent pauvre du divorce," address given at the National Judicial Institute's symposium on family law, February 10-12, 1999, Quebec City (unpublished).

  • [22] Droit de la famille-301, (1988) R.J.Q. 17 (C.A.).

  • [23] See, for example, Droit de la famille-3302, J.E. 99-1024 (C.S.); Droit de la famille-2756, B.E. 97-738 (C.S.); Droit de la famille-2473, (1996) R.D.F. 580 (C.S.); Droit de la famille-2384, (1996) R.J.Q. 912 (C.S.); Droit de la famille-3170, (1998) R.D.F. 765 (C.S.); Droit de la famille-2678, (1997) R.D.F. 354 (C.S.); Droit de la famille-2199, (1995) R.D.F. 415 (C.S.); Droit de la famille-2270, J.E. 95-1852 (C.A.); Droit de la famille-3202, (1999) R.J.Q. 248 (C.S.).

  • [24] Droit de la famille-2212, (1995) R.D.F. 421 (C.S.).  See also, Droit de la famille-2494, (1996) R.D.F. 647 (C.S.).

  • [25] Droit de la famille-3297, J.E. 99-972 (C.S.); Droit de la famille-2683, (1997) R.J.Q. 1752 (C.S.); Droit de la famille-3202, (1999) R.J.Q. 248 (C.S.).

  • [26] C. (G.) v. V.-F.(T.), [1987] 2 S.C.R. 244.

  • [27] Without citing too many examples, the following decisions, which came in the wake of C.(G.) v. V.-F.(T.), specifically reiterate that principle : Droit de la famille-301, (1988) R.J.Q. 17 (C.A.); Droit de la famille-3235, B.E. 99BE-211(C.S.); Droit de la famille-2983, B.E. 98BE-485 (C.S.); Droit de la famille-2826, (1997) R.D.F. 823 (C.S.); Droit de la famille-2487, (1996) R.D.F. 617 (C.S.); Droit de la famille-2473, (196) R.D.F. 580 (C.S.); Droit de la famille-2471, (1996) R.D.F. 556 (C.S.).

  • [28] See infra, "Certainties."

  • [29] The statutes are:

    • Civil Code of Québec, S.Q. 1991, c. 64, art. 14, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 23, 26, 42, 43, 175, 373, 434, 601, 1459.
    • An Act respecting access to documents held by public bodies and the protection of personal information, R.S.Q., c. A-2.1, ss. 53, 94.
    • An Act respecting prescription drug insurance, R.S.Q. c. A-29.01, ss. 17, 24.
    • Charter of the French Language, R.S.Q., c. C-11, s. 74.
    • Highway Safety Code, R.S.Q. c. C-24.2, ss. 24, 68.
    • Code of Civil Procedure, R.S.Q., c. C-25, ss. 776, 779, 818.1, 824, 826, 826.1.
    • Code of Criminal Procedure, R.S.Q., c. C-25.1, s. 28.
    • Public Curator Act, R.S.Q., c. C-81, ss. 34, 52.
    • Fire Investigations Act, R.S.Q., c. E-8, s. 21.1.
    • An Act respecting offences relating to alcoholic beverages, R.S.Q., c. I-8.1, ss. 103.2, 103.6.
    • Education Act, R.S.Q., c. I-13.3, s. 13.
    • Education Act for Cree, Inuit and Naskapi Native Persons, R.S.Q., c. I-14, s. 255.2.
    • Youth Protection Act, R.S.Q., c. P-34.1, s. 91.
    • An Act respecting the protection of personal information in the private sector, R.S.Q. c. P-39.1, ss. 30, 38.
    • An Act respecting the determination of the causes and circumstances of death, R.S.Q., c. R-o.2, s. 118.
    • An Act respecting child day care, R.S.Q., c. S-4.1, s. 1.
    • An Act respecting health services and social services, R.S.Q., c. S-4.2, ss. 12, 21, 25.
    • An Act respecting health services and social services for Cree and Inuit Native Persons, R.S.Q., c. S-5, ss. 8., 8.1.
    • An Act respecting the protection of persons whose mental state presents a danger to themselves or to others, R.S.Q., S.Q. 1997, c. 75, ss. 8, 19.
    • An Act respecting the distribution of financial products and services, S.Q. 1998, c. 37, s. 243.

  • [30] Art. 600, C.C.Q.

  • [31] Art. 605 C.C.Q.

  • [32] Art. 604 and 612 C.C.Q.

  • [33] For example, in Droit de la famille-3055, (1998) R.D.F. 475 (C.S.), the court, asked to rule on a question of choice of school, found that in civil law it is up to the custodial parent, mother or father, to make the decisions she or he feels are appropriate concerning the child's upbringing, particularly in religious matters, and that the non-custodial parent has nothing more than a right of supervision.

  • [34] W.(V.) v. S.(D.), [1996] 2 S.C.R. 108.

  • [35] See M. Pratte, loc. cit., and M. Giroux, loc. cit.

  • [36] Droit de la famille-2683, (1997) R.J.Q. 1752 (C.S.).

  • [37] Gordon v. Goertz, [1996] 2 S.C.R. 27.

  • [38] See Droit de la famille-3055, (1998) R.D.F. 475 (C.S.).

  • [39] See also Droit de la famille-2473, (1996) R.D.F. 580 (C.S.).

  • [40] R. Lesage, "Garde ou autorité parentale : l'emprise de la sémantique," (1988) 91 R. du N. 46, 49.

  • [41] C.(G.) v. V.-F.(T.), [1987] 2 S.C.R. 244, at 282 and 288.

  • [42] Similarly, M. Giroux, loc. cit.

  • [43] P.B. Migneault, Le droit civil canadien, Vol. II, Montreal: C. Théoret, 1896, p. 37.

  • [44] G. Trudel, Traité de droit civil du Québec, Vol. II, Montreal: Wilson et Lafleur, 1942, p. 51.

  • [45] M. Pratte, for example, aptly expressed this principle in writing that the non-custodial parent can not only make day-to-day decisions concerning the child in the course of exercising his or her right of access, "[TRANSLATION] but can also, in principle, be consulted on all decisions affecting the child's future.  The non-custodial parent must consent, for example, to medical care and changes in religious or academic instruction." M. Pratte, "La garde conjointe ...," loc. cit., p. 565.  We therefore do not agree entirely with the opinion on this matter given by Madam Justice L'Heureux-Dubé, who wrote in W.(V.) v. S.(D.), [1996] 2 S.C.R. 108, that "… authors and the courts both affirm that the Civil Code of Québec has adopted a liberal concept of custody… that gives the custodian the exclusive power to make all decisions in respect of the child…" (paragraph 70).  Suffice to recall the provisions on medical care and tutorship to point out the inaccuracy of such a statement.  Even more surprising is the fact that opinion is based on C.(G) v. V.-F.(T.), [1987] 2 S.C.R. 244, which, as we saw earlier, says the opposite.

  • [46] Droit de la famille-3331, J.E. 99-1024 (C.S.).

  • [47] P.(D.) v. S.(C.), [1993] 4 S.C.R. 141.

  • [48] This observation is even more germane to Madam Justice L'Heureux-Dubé's analysis of the civil law notion of custody in Young v. Young, which decision was handed down the same day, because that decision did not look at Quebec law, but rather the federal Divorce Act.  Several years later, Madam Justice again put forward in passing an interpretation of the concept of custody in common law and in civil law which concentrates decision-making authority in the hands of the custodial parent.

  • [49] M. Giroux, loc. cit., pp. 366 et seq.

  • [50] Gordon v. Goertz, S.(D.) v. W.(V.).

  • [51] For example, Droit de la famille-3055, (1998) R.D.F. 475 (C.S.).

  • [52] Given that the number of decisions published in law reports is small relative to the number of decisions made, we realize that the word "majority" is tenuous.

  • [53] For example, Droit de la famille-2473, (1996) R.D.F. 580 (C.S.).  See also Droit de la famille-3235, B.E. 99BE‑211 (C.S.), where the court pointed out that the non-custodial father retained all his parental authority even though he did not have custody of the children and that he must be consulted on all major decisions affecting the welfare of the children.  In that particular case, the former wife had alone made financial commitments which in the father's opinion were too costly.  Because the mother had not obtained the father's consent, the court found that she alone must bear the consequences of her decisions.  For a similar finding regarding the choice of a private school and the costs associated with such a unilateral decision, see Droit de la famille-2826, (1997) R.D.F. 823 (C.S.).

  • [54] Droit de la famille-3302, J.E. 99-1024 (C.S.); Droit de la famille-2756, B.E. 97BE-738 (C.S.); Droit de la famille-2384, (1996) R.J.Q. 912 (C.S.); Droit de la famille-2678, (1997) R.D.F. 354 (C.S.); Droit de la famille-2330, (1996) R.D.F. 76 (C.S.).

  • [55] The courts regularly reiterate the principle of joint exercise of parental authority:  Droit de la famille-3473, (1996) R.D.F. 580 (C.S.); Droit de la famille-2471, (1996) R.D.F. 556 (C.S.) ("[TRANSLATION] While sole custody is awarded to Ms. P., the father retains all the attributes of parental authority concerning major issues that affect his child." Droit de la famille-2487, (1996) R.D.F. 617 (C.S.); Droit de la famille-2199, (1995) R.D.F. 415 (C.S.).

  • [56] The only difference between these two types of order is that a joint legal custody order gives both parents the right to participate in decisions on where the child will live.

  • [57] Formation permanente du Barreau du Québec, seminar on drafting separation and divorce agreements given by S. Anfousse, Montreal, Winter 1999, p. 11.

  • [58] Droit de la famille-2962, J.E. 98-1443 (C.A.), quoted by M. Tétrault, Sherbrooke legal aid, Garde partagée.  Opinions partagées., May 1999 (typed document; my thanks to the author for sending it to me).

  • [59] B. Cossman and R. Mykitiuk, "Reforming Child Custody and Access Law in Canada:  A Discussion Paper," (1998) 15 Can. J. Fam. L., 13, p. 22.

  • [60] Droit de la famille-1884, J.E. 93-1848 (C.A.).

  • [61] D. Goubau, "L'intérêt de l'enfant et les pouvoirs résiduels du parent non gardien," (1996) Can. J. Fam. L., 11‑48.

  • [62] M. Giroux, loc. cit., p. 377.

  • [63] A. Mayrand, "La garde conjointe…," loc. cit., p. 38.

  • [64] J. Sosson, "L'autorité parentale conjointe : Des voeux du législateur à la réalité," (1996) 1 Revue trimestrielle de Droit de Louvian, 115, p. 148.

  • [65] Art. 374 and 376 of the new Belgian Civil Code.

  • [66] J. Sosson, loc. cit., p. 147.

  • [67] Art. 374, para. 5, of the Belgian Civil Code.

  • [68] J. Sosson, loc. cit., pp. 148 et seq.

  • [69] J.-L. Renchon, "La nouvelle réforme législative de l'autorité parentale," (1995) Revue trimestrielle de droit familial 380.

  • [70] Art. 374, para. 4, of the Belgian Civil Code.

  • [71] Gesetz zur Reform des Kindschaftrechts (KindRG), BGB1.I 1997, No. 84, of December 19, 1997.

  • [72] R. Frank, "Parentage Law Reform," in The International Survey of Family Law, The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff Publ., 1999, pp. 170 et seq.

  • [73] Art. 1687I.1 of the German Civil Code (BGB).

  • [74] "Gezamenlijk ouderlijk gezag," article 1:252, para. 2, of the new Dutch Civil Code.

  • [75] C. Forder, "An Undutchable Family Law:  Partnership, Parenthood, Social Parenthood, Names and Some Article 8 ECHR Case Law," in The International Survey of Family Law, The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff Publ., 1999, pp. 287-288.

  • [76] See J. De Boer, "Familie rechtelijke vernieuwingen," (1998) 1 NBJ, p. 5.

Date Modified: 2012-08-03

Top of Page
Important Notices