Court File and Parties

COURT FILE NO.: FC353/23 DATE: April 14, 2023 SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE – ONTARIO FAMILY COURT

RE: Roger Bruce Stanley Swinden and Donna Leah Crowell, Applicants

BEFORE: SAH J.

COUNSEL: M. Goodacre for the Applicants

HEARD: In Writing

Endorsement

[1] The parties have submitted a joint application seeking to validate their marriage of October 2, 2021.

[2] The parties met in late 2018, began dating in early 2019, and commenced cohabitation in March 2020.

[3] They intended to marry soon after cohabiting, but due to the COVID-19 pandemic, their plans were thwarted.

[4] When COVID-19 restrictions eased in the summer of 2021, the parties begin planning their wedding.

[5] On September 3, 2021, they attended City Hall, in London, Ontario, and obtained a marriage license.

[6] The parties participated in a ceremony at Saint James Westminster Church in London, Ontario on October 2, 2021.

[7] According to their affidavit, their marriage license was provided to the Reverend who performed the marriage, and it was signed during the ceremony.

[8] The parties’ families were present, along with 40 guests, which was the maximum occupancy permitted during the Covid restrictions. Because the parties could not host an indoor reception at the church, they held a reception and picnic lunch outside on the church's lawn.

[9] The service was performed by Reverend Hana Scorrar, an Anglican priest. This was the first marriage that the Reverend solemnized since becoming ordained.

[10] At the time of the ceremony, the parties, as well as the Reverend, were unaware that the Reverend was not registered under Ontario's Marriage Act, RSO 1990, c.M.3, as a person authorized to solemnize a marriage in the province.

[11] The Reverend deposed that she was under the mistaken belief that she was authorized to perform a marriage ceremony as a result of being ordained by the Anglican church, and that she misunderstood that she was required to be registered in accordance with the Marriage Act.

[12] By the summer of 2022, the parties had not received their marriage certificate in the mail. The parties applied online for a certificate through Service Ontario.

[13] By the end of 2022, the parties depose that they received a phone call from the Office of the Registrar General of Ontario, who informed them there was no record of their marriage.

[14] They then followed up with the Reverend.

[15] The Reverend deposed that she signed the marriage license and filled out her information as the clergy who solemnize the marriage. She further deposed that she mailed the completed marriage license to Service Canada.

[16] According to the Reverend, all proper protocol was followed during the wedding ceremony in accordance with the church’s rights and traditions.

[17] Section 31 of the Marriage Act authorizes a court to validate a marriage entered into in good faith. The section reads:

If the parties to a marriage solemnized in good faith and intended to be in compliance with this Act are not under a legal disqualification to contract such marriage and after such solemnization have lived together and cohabited as a married couple, such marriage shall be deemed a valid marriage, although the person who solemnized the marriage was not authorized to solemnize marriage, and despite the absence of or any irregularity or insufficiency in the publication of banns or the issue of the licence.

[18] Put simply, the following four elements must be applied for a marriage to be deemed valid under the Marriage Act:

[19] The marriage must have been solemnized in good faith;

[20] The marriage must have been intended to be in compliance with the Marriage Act;

[21] Neither party was under a legal disqualification to contract marriage; and,

[22] The parties must have lived together and cohabitated as a married couple after solemnization.

[23] Based on the affidavits filed, I am satisfied the parties meet the test for validation of marriage.

[24] The parties obtained a valid marriage licence before the date of the religious ceremony. They gave this licence to the Reverend who signed it after the religious ceremony performed at a church in the presence of their families. Based on this, I find that the marriage was solemnized in good faith and in accordance with the church’s rights and traditions.

[25] I accept the parties’ evidence and, based on the actions of the parties, I further find that the parties intended to comply with the Marriage Act.

[26] Unfortunately, because of information unknown to them at the time, the Reverend was not registered in accordance with the Marriage Act.

[27] The parties have met their onus of satisfying the court that the first and second elements of the test have been met.

[28] No evidence was tendered to support a finding that the parties were under a legal disqualification to contract marriage.

[29] The parties deposed that since the date of the religious marriage ceremony, they have lived and co-habited as a married couple.

[30] The parties have continued to wear their wedding rings which were exchanged during their ceremony. They have joint investments and a joint credit card. They filed their 2021 Income Tax Returns as "married". They attended a lawyer’s office to sign new Wills, believing that their previous Wills were automatically revoked by their marriage.

[31] Based on this evidence, I conclude that the parties have not only live together and cohabited but have done so as a married couple after the solemnization.

[32] The parties have met their onus of satisfying the court that the third and fourth elements of the test have been met.

[33] Having found that the parties satisfied all four elements of section 31 of the Marriage Act, the parties’ marriage of October 2, 2021 is deemed a valid marriage.

“Justice Kiran Sah” Justice Kiran Sah Date: April 14, 2023