On a preliminary insurance coverage issue arising from a motor vehicle accident, the appellants challenged the exclusion of unmarried common law partners from accident benefits under the standard automobile policy mandated by provincial legislation.
The majority held that the 1980 policy definition of "spouse" did not include unmarried partners, but that the exclusion violated s. 15(1) of the Charter because marital status is an analogous ground of discrimination and the denial of benefits perpetuated disadvantage against non-marital family units.
The infringement was not justified under s. 1 because marital status was not a reasonably relevant marker of stable economic interdependence and less impairing alternatives were available.
The Court retroactively read in the broader 1990 statutory definition of "spouse" and remitted the action for trial.
