Cohabitation Agreement Lawyers Vancouver, B.C.

What these agreements can do under the Family Law Act

A marriage or cohabitation agreement is, in law, a contract that lets a couple set their own rules in place of the ones the Family Law Act would otherwise apply. Under section 92, spouses can agree how family property and family debt will be divided — including agreeing that certain property is not to be shared at all, or that it will be divided in shares other than the equal split the Act sets as the default. The agreement can also fix how spousal support will be handled, and it can settle the treatment of assets that would otherwise be argued over at separation. It cannot bargain away child support, which the law treats as the child’s right rather than the parents’ to trade.

Timing is part of why these agreements matter in British Columbia. Common-law couples become “spouses” for property purposes once they have lived together in a marriage-like relationship for two continuous years, at which point the same equal-sharing rules that apply to married couples switch on under section 3. A cohabitation agreement signed before that two-year mark lets a couple decide the terms while the default rules are still off — a deliberate choice made calmly, rather than a fight after the relationship has ended.

Protecting excluded property — and the growth most people forget

The Family Law Act already protects some property automatically. Under section 85, excluded property — what you brought into the relationship, plus gifts and inheritances received by one spouse — generally stays with that spouse and is not divided. The catch is the part people miss: while the original value is excluded, any increase in that value during the relationship is family property and is shared. A condo worth $500,000 when the relationship began and $800,000 at separation shields the $500,000, but the $300,000 of growth is on the table. The same is true of a business, an investment portfolio, or inherited land that appreciates while you are together.

An agreement is the tool that closes that gap. A couple can agree that a specific asset and its growth both stay with one spouse, that a family business remains separate, or that an expected inheritance is off-limits — outcomes the default rules would not produce on their own. For people entering a relationship with a business, a professional practice, property, or children from a prior relationship to protect, this is usually the whole point of putting an agreement in place.

Making an agreement a court will uphold

An agreement is only worth what it can withstand. Two things do the most to make one durable: full financial disclosure and independent legal advice for each person. Disclosure means each spouse honestly sets out their income, property, and debts before signing — a concealed asset is the classic reason a court later intervenes. Independent legal advice means each person has their own lawyer explaining what the agreement means and what they are giving up, which produces a record that the person understood the terms and signed freely.

Those steps line up directly with how a court reviews an agreement. Under section 93, a property agreement can be set aside where a spouse failed to disclose significant assets or debts, took improper advantage of the other’s vulnerability, or did not understand the nature or consequences of the agreement. Even a procedurally clean agreement carries a backstop: it can still be replaced if it is significantly unfair when viewed at the time of separation, weighed against how long ago it was made and how much the couple relied on it. Signing on the eve of a wedding, without advice or disclosure, is exactly the fact pattern that invites a challenge — while an agreement negotiated with time, full disclosure, and separate lawyers is the one that holds.