In 2009, The Supreme Court of Quebec rejected Lola’s claim for $56,000 (Canadian) per month for herself and $50 million as a lump sum. Eric was already giving her $411,000 per year as child-support payments for their three kids.
- The Quebec government, however, was astounded. The provincial Justice Minister, Jean-Marc Fournier, declared that the appeal court decision would harm the individual’s right to choose what kind of matrimonial state they want for themselves. The Quebec government has appealed the decision to the Supreme Court of Canada, which will rule on it by July.
- The sums of money involved make Eric and Lola’s case somewhat absurd to the average Canadian. But it could shape the lives of the 1.2 million Quebecois in de facto couples, making them as good as married, even though neither of them exchanged rings or asked the other person’s permission to spend their lives together.
- Ever practical, Quebec’s lovebirds are taking precautions. Linda, a 43-year-old woman in Longueuil, moved in with her boyfriend a couple of months ago. He told her that he is going to make her sign a legal document to protect himself in case the “Eric and Lola trial” turns out in favor of Lola. Linda wasn’t shocked and she wasn’t insulted. Being a de facto spouse is normal, the modern way to go. “His legal paper, he can bring it on! If he wouldn’t have suggested it, maybe I would have.” She is happy not to be married, and happy not to be obliged to provide for him.
Finally, the Supreme Court couldn’t free Davis last night, because in doing so, it would have violated its authority as an appeals court. The justices’ job is to judge constitutionality. They have no authority to decide on innocence — any attempt to do that could set a dangerous precedent.
Process always trumps a man’s life. Why is “common law” called “common”?