Quebec Common-Law Spouse With No Will: Why a $900,000 Montreal Estate Goes to the Children — Not the Partner — Under Civil Law in 2026

$900,000 in Assets, 20 Years Together, Zero Inheritance

Marc and Sophie lived together in Montreal for 22 years. They raised two children, paid off a Plateau-Mont-Royal townhouse, and built retirement savings. When Marc died suddenly in February 2026, Sophie assumed she would inherit his estate — the home they shared, his RRSP, and his TFSA.

She inherited nothing. Marc had no will. Under Quebec's Civil Code, their 22-year relationship gave Sophie exactly the same legal inheritance rights as a stranger. Marc's entire $900,000 estate — the $550,000 home, the $250,000 RRSP, and the $100,000 TFSA — passed to their two adult children under intestacy. Sophie was left living in a home she no longer owned, with no claim to a dollar of the wealth they had built together.

This is not an edge case. This is the default outcome for every unmarried couple in Quebec who does not have a will.

Why Quebec Is Different: The Civil Code and Contractual Freedom

Every other Canadian province grants common-law partners some form of automatic inheritance rights after a qualifying period — typically 1 to 3 years of cohabitation. Ontario's Succession Law Reform Act (SLRA) includes common-law partners after 3 years. BC's Wills, Estates and Succession Act (WESA) extends full spousal rights after 2 years. Manitoba's threshold is 3 years or one year if there is a child of the relationship.

Quebec's Civil Code takes the opposite approach. Articles 653 to 658 define the intestacy hierarchy: descendants (children) first, then the married spouse, then parents, then siblings. A conjoint de fait — regardless of the duration of cohabitation — is not mentioned anywhere in the intestacy provisions.

The principle is contractual freedom. The Quebec legislature treats the decision not to marry as a deliberate choice to remain outside the legal framework that accompanies marriage: family patrimony, compensatory allowance, support obligations, and inheritance rights. The Supreme Court of Canada upheld this distinction in Quebec (Attorney General) v. A (2013), ruling 5-4 that the exclusion does not violate section 15 of the Charter.

Where Marc's $900,000 Estate Goes Under Quebec Intestacy

Under articles 666 to 669 of the Civil Code of Quebec, when a person dies without a will and has descendants (children), the entire estate goes to those descendants in equal shares. Here is exactly where each of Marc's assets flows:

Asset 1: The $550,000 Plateau-Mont-Royal Townhouse

Marc held the home in his name alone. Under intestacy, the two children inherit it equally — $275,000 each. Sophie has no legal right to remain in the home. The children could sell it, demand rent, or allow Sophie to stay informally — but there is no statutory right of possession for a de facto spouse.

Because the home was Marc's principal residence for the entire period of ownership, the principal residence exemption eliminates any capital gains tax on the deemed disposition at death. This applies regardless of who inherits — the exemption belongs to Marc, not the recipient.

Asset 2: The $250,000 RRSP

Marc's RRSP had no valid beneficiary designation. In Quebec, even if Marc had named Sophie as beneficiary at the bank, that designation is not legally effective — Quebec is unique in Canada in that RRSP beneficiary designations must be made in a will or notarial document, not at the financial institution.

The RRSP defaults to the estate and passes to the children under intestacy. Two consequences:

• Income tax: The full $250,000 is included as income on Marc's final T1 return. At Quebec's top combined federal-provincial marginal rate of approximately 53.3%, the tax bill is roughly $133,000. This tax is paid by the estate before the children receive their share
• No spousal rollover: If Sophie were the designated beneficiary (via the will), the RRSP could roll over to her RRSP tax-deferred — no immediate tax. Because the RRSP goes to the children instead, the rollover is unavailable. The $133,000 in tax is permanently lost to the estate

Asset 3: The $100,000 TFSA

The TFSA passes to the children under intestacy. Because TFSAs transfer tax-free to any beneficiary (the account has already been funded with after-tax dollars), there is no immediate tax consequence. However, the children receive the $100,000 as a cash payment — the TFSA is collapsed, and any growth between the date of death and the distribution date is taxable to the children.

Had Sophie been named as successor holder, the TFSA would have continued as her own TFSA — preserving the tax-sheltered status indefinitely. As a successor holder vs. beneficiary analysis shows, this distinction matters less for the immediate tax but significantly for long-term compounding.

The Tax Damage: $133,000 That a Will Would Have Prevented

Here is the complete tax picture of Marc's estate:

• Principal residence ($550,000): $0 tax — principal residence exemption applies
• RRSP ($250,000): $133,000 tax — full amount included as income on final return, no spousal rollover available
• TFSA ($100,000): $0 tax — TFSAs are always tax-free on death
• Total tax: $133,000
• Net estate to children: $900,000 - $133,000 = $767,000

If Marc had a will leaving everything to Sophie:

• Principal residence: $0 tax (same)
• RRSP: $0 immediate tax — spousal rollover to Sophie's RRSP, tax deferred until her withdrawals
• TFSA: $0 tax (same) — successor holder preserves tax-free status
• Total tax at Marc's death: $0
• Net estate to Sophie: $900,000

The difference: $133,000 in immediate tax — not because Canada has an inheritance tax (it doesn't), but because the deemed disposition rules apply differently depending on who receives the assets. A surviving common-law partner qualifies for the spousal rollover under federal tax law — but only if the assets actually reach them. Quebec intestacy ensures they don't.

Ontario Comparison: The Same $900,000 Estate With Completely Different Outcomes

If Marc and Sophie lived in Toronto instead of Montreal — with the same assets, same 22-year relationship, same absence of a will — the outcome would be entirely different.

Under Ontario's Succession Law Reform Act (SLRA), a person who has lived in a conjugal relationship for at least 3 years qualifies as a "spouse" for intestacy purposes. Sophie would be recognized as Marc's spouse and would receive:

• Preferential share: The first $350,000 of the estate goes to the surviving spouse
• Distributive share: Of the remaining $550,000 ($900,000 - $350,000), the spouse receives one-half ($275,000) when there are two or more children
• Sophie's total: $350,000 + $275,000 = $625,000
• Children's total: $275,000 (split equally: $137,500 each)

The tax picture also changes dramatically. Because Sophie receives Marc's assets as a recognized spouse, the RRSP rolls over to her tax-deferred. The estate pays $0 in immediate income tax instead of $133,000.

The Three Documents Every Quebec Common-Law Couple Needs

The gap between Quebec civil law and federal tax law creates a problem that no single document can solve alone. Three documents, working together, are required:

Document 1: A Notarial Will (Testament Notarié)

What it fixes: Gives the common-law partner inheritance rights that Quebec intestacy law denies. Names the partner as heir and — critically — as RRSP/RRIF beneficiary (since direct designations at the financial institution are invalid in Quebec).

What it doesn't fix: Does not protect the surviving partner's rights during the relationship (separation) or prevent challenges from the deceased's children from a prior relationship. Also does not address incapacity — a will only takes effect at death.

Quebec-specific note: A notarial will (executed before a notary) does not require probate in Quebec — it is immediately effective. This is a significant advantage over a holograph (handwritten) will, which must be verified by the court. For common-law couples, the notarial form eliminates delays and legal costs.

Document 2: A Cohabitation Agreement (Convention de Vie Commune)

What it fixes: Establishes property rights during the relationship and on separation. Without this, a Quebec common-law partner has no right to family patrimony division (the matrimonial home, vehicles, pensions, RRSPs accumulated during cohabitation) that married spouses receive automatically. The agreement can also specify what happens to jointly used assets if one partner dies — providing immediate clarity before the will is even read.

What it doesn't fix: Does not transfer assets on death (that requires the will) and does not affect CRA tax treatment (that requires proper beneficiary designations).

Document 3: Beneficiary Designations in the Will

What it fixes: Enables the spousal rollover for RRSPs, RRIFs, and the successor holder designation for TFSAs. This is the document that prevents the $133,000 tax hit on Marc's $250,000 RRSP.

What it doesn't fix: Does not give the partner any rights during the relationship (separation scenario) and does not address non-registered assets or real property.

Critical Quebec rule: Unlike every other province, Quebec does not recognize RRSP or TFSA beneficiary designations made directly at the financial institution. The designation must be in the will or a separate notarial document. Many Quebec residents — especially those who moved from another province — have beneficiary designations at their bank that are legally meaningless. This is perhaps the single most dangerous gap in Quebec estate planning versus Ontario.

The Federal-Provincial Gap That Creates the Tax Trap

The core issue is a mismatch between two legal systems:

• CRA (federal): Recognizes common-law partners after 12 months of cohabitation. They file taxes as a couple, share credits, and qualify for spousal rollovers on death
• Quebec Civil Code (provincial): Does not recognize common-law partners for any inheritance or property purpose. They are legal strangers for succession law

This creates an absurd situation: the CRA offers a spousal rollover on Marc's RRSP to Sophie (because they qualify as common-law partners federally), but Sophie cannot access the rollover because Quebec intestacy law sends the RRSP to the children instead. The tax benefit exists in law but is inaccessible without a will.

The same gap affects:

• Principal residence exemption: If Marc owned a cottage and a home, the principal residence designation on the cottage would be wasted — the children inherit it, and the deceased's exemption cannot be transferred to them for their own principal residence
• Capital gains rollover: Non-registered assets with accrued gains trigger deemed disposition and capital gains tax when passing to children, but would roll over tax-free to a common-law spouse if designated in a will
• Pension benefits: CPP survivor pension is available to a common-law partner (federal program), but employer pension death benefits governed by Quebec law may not be

What Happens When Children Inherit Instead of a Partner: The Human Cost

Beyond the $133,000 tax hit, the practical consequences for Sophie are severe:

1. The home: Sophie lives in a house now owned by her children. If the relationship with the children is good, they may allow her to stay. If there is conflict — common in blended families or when adult children have their own financial pressures — she can be forced to leave
2. No support obligation: Unlike a married spouse, a Quebec common-law partner has no right to spousal support from the deceased's estate. The children are under no legal obligation to provide for Sophie
3. No family patrimony: The home, RRSPs accumulated during the relationship, and the family vehicle are not divided as "family patrimony" — that concept only applies to married spouses in Quebec
4. GIS eligibility: If Sophie is over 65 and loses access to the shared household income, she may qualify for the Guaranteed Income Supplement — but this is poverty-level support, not an estate plan

This is the scenario that a financial planner specializing in inheritance planning sees repeatedly in Quebec: partners who contributed equally to a household for decades and are left with nothing because the legal structure was never put in place.

Special Quebec Rules That Compound the Problem

Several Quebec-specific legal rules make the common-law inheritance gap more dangerous than in other provinces:

• No beneficiary designations at financial institutions: In Ontario, naming a spouse as RRSP beneficiary at the bank is sufficient. In Quebec, this designation is legally void. The only valid designation is in a will or notarial document
• No WESA-style variation claims: BC and some other provinces allow dependants to challenge a will (or intestacy) if they were not adequately provided for. Quebec has no equivalent — a common-law partner cannot challenge the intestacy result, no matter how unfair
• Notarial wills avoid probate: A notarial will in Quebec is self-proving and does not require court verification. This is actually an advantage — it means the will takes effect immediately on death with no delay. But it also means there is no court review that might catch the absence of provision for a common-law partner
• Life insurance is the one exception: Life insurance beneficiary designations made directly with the insurer ARE valid in Quebec (unlike RRSP designations). A life insurance policy naming Sophie as beneficiary would pay directly to her regardless of the will or intestacy rules — making life insurance the one asset class that works the same way in Quebec as elsewhere

The Action Plan: Protecting a $900,000 Quebec Common-Law Estate

For Quebec common-law couples with assets in Marc and Sophie's range, the implementation plan:

1. Notarial will (both partners): Name each other as universal legatee (héritier universel). Include explicit RRSP and RRIF beneficiary designations in the will. Specify the TFSA successor holder designation. Cost: $300-$800 per person. Timeline: 1-2 weeks with a Quebec notary
2. Cohabitation agreement: Define property rights, division on separation, and each partner's obligations. Address what happens to the shared home during the surviving partner's lifetime. Cost: $1,000-$3,000. Timeline: 2-4 weeks with a notary or family law attorney
3. Life insurance review: Verify beneficiary designations at the insurer (these ARE valid in Quebec). Consider term or permanent insurance to cover the tax liability that would arise if the will is ever challenged or invalidated
4. Annual review: Unlike Ontario where intestacy provides a safety net, Quebec common-law couples have zero margin for error. A will that becomes outdated — naming a deceased beneficiary, or failing to account for new assets — can recreate the same problem Marc's family now faces

The Bottom Line: Quebec Common-Law Couples Cannot Rely on the Law

In every other province, the law provides a baseline of protection for long-term partners. It may not be perfect — and a will always improves on intestacy — but a common-law partner in Ontario, BC, or Manitoba will not be left with nothing after 20 years together.

Quebec is different. The Civil Code does not protect common-law couples. The Supreme Court has confirmed that this is constitutional. The only protection available is the protection you create yourself — through a will, a cohabitation agreement, and proper beneficiary designations made in the legally required form.

Marc's estate lost $133,000 to unnecessary tax and Sophie lost access to $900,000 in shared wealth — all because of documents that would have cost under $4,000 and taken two weeks to prepare. The gap between Quebec law and common assumption is not a technical nuance. It is a $900,000 mistake waiting to happen in every unmarried Montreal household that has not visited a notary.