Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, the previous sections of this Act would assist a person who was in a common-law relationship where they owned a house and that house was, for example, a half-house. That house was in the name of only one of the parties. The previous sections of this Act dealing with division of property would help that person if they wanted to apply to have the court determine their ownership interest in the house. The entire Family Law Act will apply to common-law couples, and it will give them a new right to apply for a division of property, regardless of in whose name the property is registered. The intent of this motion has to be read in conjunction with a number of motions that have yet to be moved, but the intent of this motion is to address the situation of exclusive possession orders where the parties reside in leased premises. Sometimes, when the parties reside in leased premises, housing associations and housing authorities will not abide by a court order granting one party exclusive possession if the party who was granted exclusive possession is not a party to the lease, or is not named in the lease.

This is to address the situation where, and it has to be read in conjunction with upcoming motions, somebody leases a property, their spouse is not on the lease and the court orders exclusive possession to the person who is not on the lease. That is the intent of this motion. The issue dealing with common-law couples and property where it is nonleased premises and owned premises is dealt with earlier on in this Family Law Act and would apply to assist a couple in the situation that Mr. Krutko described. I hope that is clear. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.