Divorce Reform in Canada: New Perspectives; An Analytical Review of Bill C-10 (Canada), 1984

Abstract

Bill C-10 (Canada), 1984 is entitled An Act to Amend the Divorce Act (R.S.C., 1970, c. 10). In reality, however, the fundamental character of some of the changes proposed therein constitutes a major reform of substantive divorce law and provides a limited foundation for radical changes in the adversarial legal process. The concept of “no-fault” divorce that was proposed by the Law Reform Commission of Canada in its Working Papers and Report on Family Law constitutes the basis of Bill C-10 with regard to the freedom to divorce and the judicial determination of the right to and quantum of spousal maintenance. But Bill C-10 provides little by way of a framework for the implementation of the Law Commission's recommendations for new processes that would ameliorate the injurious effects of the adversarial legal process. For example, the use of mediation as an alternative to the litigation of disputed issues is endorsed in clauses 5 and 16 of Bill C-10, but these clauses, and particularly clause 5, are badly drafted and are unlikely to foster mediated settlements where either lawyer representing the parties is intent on a battle in open court. Bill C-10 introduces much-needed policy objectives to assist the courts in determining whether spousal maintenance should be ordered on the dissolution of the marriage. Here again, however, the drafting is less precise than might be considered appropriate. The “best interests of the child” is declared to be the paramount criterion in applications for the maintenance, custody, care and upbringing of children, but no specific guidelines are provided with respect to the factors that might be relevant to a determination of a child's best interests. Joint custody orders and third party orders are expressly permitted, but not expressly encouraged, by clause 10 of Bill C-10. The jurisdictional requirements of section 5 (1) of the Divorce Act, R.S.C. 1970, c. D-8 have been simplified by clause 3 of Bill C-10, which retains only the one year ordinary residence requirement. Corresponding adjustments have been made to section 6 of the Divorce Act, which governs the recognition of foreign divorce decrees. Bill C-10 (Canada), 1984 thus constitutes a blending of the old and new. Whether this blend produces vintage wine or vinegar is a matter of opinion.