Separating Without Being Married: A Practical Map of Your Rights in Quebec

House, furniture, accounts, debts, vehicles and children — who keeps what when you never signed a marriage contract.

Sophie and Karim met in Hull in 2014. They bought a condo together in 2017, fifty-fifty on the deed. Two children were born, in 2019 and 2022. Today, things have fallen apart. Karim has left the condo with two suitcases and the family SUV, which is registered in his name. Sophie stays behind with the children, the mortgage, the joint line of credit and a renovation invoice she signed alone. She calls a friend, who answers with great confidence: “Since last year, everything is automatically shared between common-law partners.” That is not accurate, and the nuance is worth tens of thousands of dollars. Here is the map of the territory, piece by piece.

First question: are you in a parental union or not?

Since 30 June 2025, an unmarried couple who become the parents of the same child are automatically subject to the parental union regime (union parentale). That regime creates a patrimony made up of the family residences, the household furniture and the family vehicles, the net value of which is shared on separation. It also protects the family residence and opens the door to a compensatory allowance.

But the regime covers only couples whose common child was born or adopted after 29 June 2025. Sophie and Karim, parents since 2019, are not subject to it. They may opt in voluntarily through an agreement signed before a notary or before two witnesses, but until they do, the ordinary rules of civil law apply. And the starting point of those rules is brutally simple: each partner remains the owner of whatever is in their name. There is no family patrimony, no partnership of acquests, and no spousal support between former partners. The Supreme Court confirmed this in 2013 in the case known as “Lola”: the legislature’s silence did not violate the Charter, because partners remain free to marry or to contract.

The roof over your head: three very different scenarios

The house is in one name. It belongs to that person, full stop. The other acquires no ownership right merely from having lived there, paid for the groceries or repainted the basement. The trap is to stay in that situation for years telling yourself “it’s our house”. Without a notarial deed, it is not.

The house is in both names. You are in undivided co-ownership (indivision): two owners of the same property, without the property being physically divided. Each may use the property, but no one is bound to remain in indivision. In practical terms, either partner can force the partition — meaning a sale, or a buy-out of the other’s share. Since it is rarely wise to force two exes to live together, a court may grant one of them exclusive use of the home, weighing all the circumstances, including the children’s living environment. The partner deprived of that use is entitled to compensation, often calculated from the rental value, since that partner remains liable for a share of the expenses. Settle this question quickly: the more time passes, the harder it becomes to reconstruct fair occupancy terms after the fact.

You are tenants. If the lease is in both names, each of you is bound to the landlord. If the lease is in one name only and that person leaves, the common-law partner who lived with them for at least six months may become the tenant in turn: that partner must continue to occupy the dwelling and must notify the landlord within two months of the end of the cohabitation. The deadline is short and many people miss it.

Furniture, accounts and vehicles

For furniture, the rule is one of evidence: invoices, card statements, photos and emails are worth a thousand recollections. What one partner bought belongs to that partner; what was bought together is held in indivision and is shared. Gifts received by one partner remain that partner’s own.

A joint bank account belongs to both, but either holder can generally empty it alone. The trap is well known: first come, first served. If the funds came mostly from one partner, that partner will have to prove it in order to recover a portion. A useful reflex as soon as you separate: document the balances, and speak to the financial institution before rather than after.

A vehicle follows its registration and title. A partner whose name does not appear has no right to the car, even after paying half of it — unless that partner proves the contribution and claims compensation for it.

Debts: solidarity is never presumed

In Quebec civil law, solidarity between debtors is never presumed. In other words, a debt binds the person who contracted it. Unlike married spouses, common-law partners are subject to no rule making one liable for debts the other incurred for the family’s current needs.

Three exceptions hurt in practice. If you co-signed a loan, a line of credit or a lease, the creditor can claim the whole amount from either of you. If you acted as endorser or surety, the same is true. And if the debt served to acquire or improve jointly held property, it will be taken into account when the indivision is partitioned. The trap: believing that a verbal arrangement between you (“you’re the one paying the line of credit”) binds the bank. It does not. Only repayment, substitution of the borrower, or closing the account releases you.

Children and last-resort remedies

Where children are concerned, there is no difference between married and unmarried parents. Parental authority remains joint, child support is calculated the same way under the Quebec model, and every decision about the time a child spends with each parent is made solely in the child’s interest. Being in a parental union or not changes none of this.

That leaves the safety net for the disadvantaged partner. Unjust enrichment allows a claim for an indemnity where one person has been enriched at another’s expense without justification: the partner who worked for free in the other’s business, the one who left a job for the family while the other built up wealth, the one who paid for major renovations on the other’s house. The indemnity is capped at the value of the enrichment, and the claim is prescribed — that is, extinguished — three years after the end of the cohabitation. The tacit partnership (société tacite) is the other avenue: where the partners genuinely pooled property and labour in an economic project, intending to share the profits, one may seek the liquidation of that de facto partnership. It is harder to prove and remains exceptional. In recent years, courts have grown more receptive to these remedies, but legal scholars remain divided on the method of calculation: compensate the value of the services rendered, or a share of the wealth accumulated? The result can vary threefold.

Key takeaways

Check first whether you are in a parental union: it covers only couples whose common child was born or adopted after 29 June 2025.
Outside a parental union, each partner keeps what is in their name. There is no automatic sharing and there is never spousal support between former common-law partners.
Property in both names is held in indivision: no one is bound to stay in it, and the partner deprived of the use of the home is entitled to compensation.
Living in a rental but not named on the lease? You have two months after the end of the cohabitation to notify the landlord if you want to stay.
A debt binds the person who signed it, absent a co-signature or suretyship. A verbal arrangement between you does not bind the bank.
If you became poorer for the other’s benefit, act: the unjust enrichment claim is prescribed three years after the end of the cohabitation.