marik said:
also, what about this,
if you have to wait a year living apart, before you can even apply for a D, does that mean that anything you do within that year could be held against you in court? (ie: would dating someone else during this time be held against you as infeldity?)
No at least not in most US states because you would be separated during that time. The Canadian law doesn't sound all that different from most US states. They just try in both countries to give you as much time as possible to reconcile. In the U.S you can file right away but it takes a long time to become effective.
Canada
CANADIAN DIVORCE LAW
(With thanks to the Legal Assistance Center)
Before 1968, Canadian divorce law varied from province to province. Adultery was the sole ground for divorce in most provinces, except in Nova Scotia where cruelty was an additional ground. Spousal support was typically only an obligation that could be imposed on a guilty husband, in favor of his innocent wife. However, the Divorce Act of 1968 introduced nationwide no-fault grounds (in addition to fault grounds) for divorce, and established equality in support rights and obligations between men and women.
Canada's current divorce law came into effect on 1 June 1986. This federal law sets forth the grounds for divorce (which are both non-fault and fault based) and the criteria for spousal and child support and custody of and access to children on or after divorce that apply throughout Canada. The standards for property distribution upon divorce fall outside of the Divorce Act, however, and are regulated by provincial or territorial legislation.
GROUNDS FOR DIVORCE
Under the 1986 law, there is one ground for divorce in Canada: "breakdown of marriage." This ground is established if (1) the spouses have lived apart for at least one year immediately preceding the divorce judgment, (2) the defendant spouse has committed adultery, or (3) the defendant spouse has treated the plaintiff spouse with physical or mental cruelty of such a kind as to render continuation of the marriage intolerable. The first criterion is a non-fault one and may be invoked by either or both spouses. It should be noted that a divorce action may be commenced before the one-year period has run, but the divorce judgment cannot be granted until it has elapsed. The second and third criteria, which allow a quicker divorce (without the one-year waiting period) are fault-based and are available only to the "innocent" spouse.
Canadian divorce law seeks to encourage reconciliation. The 1986 Act (as did the 1968 Act) requires divorce lawyers to discuss the possibility of reconciliation and to inform clients of available counseling or guidance facilities. The 1986 Act further requires lawyers to promote negotiated settlements and mediation of support and custody disputes.
The 1986 Act (again, like its predecessor) also requires that the court, before considering the evidence in a divorce case, must be satisfied that there is no possibility of reconciliation between the spouses, unless it would not be appropriate to do so under the circumstances. Moreover, the court must adjourn the proceedings if at any stage it sees a possibility of reconciliation, to give the parties the opportunity to attempt to reconcile. The court, either on its own motion or on request of the parties, may appoint a qualified person or agency to assist the parties in this attempt. However, once 14 days have passed from the date of the adjournment, the court must resume the proceeding on the application of either or both spouses. The 1986 Act and its predecessor make clear, however, that any person nominated to assist the parties in a reconciliation attempt cannot testify in any subsequent divorce proceeding, nor is evidence of any admission or communication made in a reconciliation attempt admissible in such a proceeding.
