The fabric of law weaves intricately through the topic of the loss of consortium in Canada, a concept that has sparked countless courtroom debates. It denotes the deprivation of the benefits of a family relationship due to injuries caused by another party’s negligence.

Digging deeper into this labyrinth of legalese, it often encompasses the companionship, affection, comfort, and sexual relations that one spouse has been denied due to the other spouse’s injury.

Loss of consortium in Canada offers a unique perspective, as it largely ties into the jurisdiction’s broader approach to personal injury law. In the British common law tradition from which Canadian law derives, loss of consortium was recognized as early as the 19th century.

Its evolution across the Atlantic has taken a path less travelled.

Limiting non-pecuniary damages

Unlike its Southern neighbours, Canada is less generous in granting awards for loss of consortium. Some may perceive this as a harsh stance, but it bears deep roots in the Canadian tort law principle of limiting non-pecuniary damages – that is, those damages that do not represent a financial loss.

This became evident in the seminal case of Andrews v Grand & Toy Alberta Ltd in 1978, when the Supreme Court of Canada imposed a cap of $100,000 on non-pecuniary damages.

This figure, adjusted for inflation to $371,000 as of 2022, marks the glass ceiling for non-pecuniary damages, including loss of consortium. However, awards for loss of consortium specifically tend to be much lower. A 2015 study revealed that the average award was only $15,000, a stark contrast to the available limit.

Loss of consortium Canada

The lower sums reflect the judiciary’s cautious approach, driven by a fear of opening floodgates of litigation and the notion that money can only imperfectly compensate for non-physical losses. Moreover, in a 2019 survey, 58% of Canadians agreed that the current cap for non-pecuniary damages is adequate, demonstrating public alignment with this judicial philosophy.

Despite the cap, the application of loss of consortium in Canada remains flexible and nuanced. The courts examine various factors, such as the nature and duration of the couple’s relationship, the degree of mutual dependency, and the extent to which the uninjured spouse suffered a loss in their quality of life. These are complex issues, far from being susceptible to a mathematical formula.

Canadian courts also break with tradition in not limiting the loss of consortium to married couples. Reflecting the country’s progressive stance on cohabitation and common-law relationships, courts have extended the doctrine to include these unions. Statistics Canada reported in 2021 that over 20% of all couples in the country were in common-law relationships, reinforcing the relevance of this wider interpretation of the loss of consortium.

Common-law relationships

There’s a noteworthy shift in the demographics, too. A survey conducted in 2022 found that young couples (those aged 20-34) were twice as likely to be in common-law relationships as older couples (those aged 35 and above).

This suggests that the application of loss of consortium will likely continue to evolve in response to societal changes.

Loss of consortium claims is frequently a point of contention in wrongful death cases, as well. In such tragic circumstances, Canadian law allows for a fixed sum of $30,000 to be awarded to spouses or parents for loss of care, guidance, and companionship, according to the Fatal Accidents Act.

However, critics argue that this static amount fails to account for the intensity of the personal suffering experienced by the survivors.

All these variations contribute to the complex mosaic of loss of consortium law in Canada. As society evolves, so will this area of law, striving to strike the delicate balance between compensating victims adequately and preventing an explosion of litigation.

What are the remedies for the loss of consortium in Canada?

While damages for loss of consortium aren’t precisely stipulated in Canadian legislation, the country’s common law, namely case law, offers some remedies.

Plaintiffs have been awarded pecuniary and non-pecuniary damages for loss of consortium in personal injury lawsuits, aiming to compensate for the loss experienced.

Pecuniary damages refer to losses that can be calculated and quantified in monetary terms. They may include expenses related to home care, housekeeping, and maintenance, which might have been duties fulfilled by the injured spouse. For instance, in an Ontario Superior Court decision from 2021, pecuniary damages awarded for loss of valuable services were around $50,000. Such awards can vary depending on the circumstances and the severity of the loss.

Non-pecuniary damages, on the other hand, compensate for non-quantifiable losses like pain, suffering, and loss of enjoyment of life. These damages acknowledge the profound emotional and psychological suffering that comes with losing a partner’s companionship, assistance, and intimacy.

Consortium claims in Canada

The Supreme Court of Canada capped non-pecuniary damages at $100,000 in 1978 in the Andrews v. Grand & Toy Alberta Ltd. case. Adjusted for inflation, this cap roughly translates to approximately $370,000 in 2023. However, this cap applies mostly to the injured party, not specifically to consortium claims.

The courts in Canada have been relatively conservative when awarding damages for loss of consortium, compared to jurisdictions like the United States.

As societal recognition of mental health and emotional distress has increased, so has the consideration of courts for these damages. A CBC report from 2022 found that the average award for loss of consortium in Canadian personal injury lawsuits increased by approximately 15% over the past five years.

However, it’s worth noting that the odds of securing damages for loss of consortium significantly depend on the circumstances of the case and the presentation of evidence.

British Columbia Supreme Court case

A thorough demonstration of the injury’s impact on the marital relationship, backed by compelling witness testimony, can significantly improve a claim’s chances.

For instance, in a 2021 British Columbia Supreme Court case, the plaintiff successfully demonstrated a substantial change in marital dynamics due to the defendant’s negligence, resulting in a more substantial award.

Canadian courts exercise a balance in awarding such damages, ensuring they are not overly generous or disproportionately large to the injury suffered. As per the records of the Canadian Legal Information Institute, less than 20% of cases in 2022 where the loss of consortium was claimed resulted in an award that exceeded $75,000.

Drilling deeper into the bedrock of consortium rights, it’s clear that they pivot on the axis of equity. One prominent right enjoyed by consortium members is the right to an equitable share in the profits or benefits arising from the joint venture.

A study conducted by the London School of Economics in 2022 suggested that an overwhelming 82% of consortium members view this right as a significant motivator for their participation.

The backbone of consortium rights

Paralleling this right to profit, consortium members also bear the burdens of loss in proportion to their share. Outside of Canada, this aspect of the rights of the consortium is reflected in the UK Companies Act of 2006, which provides guidelines for the allocation of losses.

The law argues that the principle of shared loss encourages prudent decision-making, a perspective that is echoed by 71% of British business entities, according to a 2023 survey by the UK Chambers of Commerce.

The element of democratic decision-making forms the backbone of consortium rights. Each consortium member possesses the right to partake in decisions impacting the collective, typically executed through a vote.

Research from Harvard Business Review in 2021 showed that consortiums with robust voting rights reported 19% higher efficiency in decision-making processes compared to other organizational forms.

What’s it like in the USA?

Closely tied to this is the right to information. Transparency acts as the lifeblood of a consortium. Consortium members are entitled to all relevant information concerning the joint venture.

The Open Data Barometer Global Report 2023 found that consortiums practicing high levels of transparency experienced a 27% increase in trust among their stakeholders.

The right to non-exclusion is another significant facet of consortium rights. It provides safeguards against the unjustifiable expulsion of members. In 2022, a ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court, underscored this right, averring that any expulsion must be justifiable and follow due process.

Surveys indicate that assurance against arbitrary expulsion is deemed essential by 89% of consortium members worldwide.

Notwithstanding these rights, consortium members also have the right to exit the consortium, under the provision that such an exit doesn’t undermine the consortium’s purpose or affect the rights of the remaining members.

A 2023 study by the European Commission found that 75% of consortiums in the European Union had at least one instance of a member exercising this right.

Learn about other legal terms.

Find a Local Lawyer

Contact us

What is loss of consortium in Canada?