1. Objectifs

Intentions :
L’article aborde l’inertie législative de l’État québécois en matière d’union de fait et de cohabitation, en comparant le cas québécois à celui de la France.

2. Méthode

Échantillon/Matériau :
Données documentaires diverses

Type de traitement des données :
Réflexion critique

3. Résumé

Authors conclude that «[i]nsights from critical literature on boundaries and law reform highlight the contingency and permeability of several major boundaries around marriage and cohabitation. Even in the face of ostensible legislative inaction, categories and their legal significance may shift. Thus, a conservative approach to marriage and cohabitation in Quebec and France has not wholly ‘conserved’ marriage. […] This article diagnoses legal discourse in France and Quebec as symptomatic of a reductive view of the civil tradition – one that emphasizes the role of choice, contract, and formal undertakings to the detriment of complicating, complementary elements. Identifying underlying causes must await another day. Even if Quebec’s minority location and the links often posited between an ostensibly distinctive culture and the civil tradition (and the French language) might predictably foment monolithic simplifications in the service of easier preservation, such factors ought not to apply in France. It is obvious that legislatures may recognize cohabitants differently from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. Less obvious is the call, modelled by this article, to understand legislative inaction as a promising site for comparative inquiry.» (p. 538)