Canadian laws give Rights for Common Law Spouse

A Canadian woman helped set a legal precedent in England yesterday when a judge ruled she should be allowed to publicize the details of her stormy love affair with a millionaire racehorse owner.

The decision by England's Court of Appeal marks the latest chapter in a bitter dispute between Glory Anne Clibbery, originally from Northwestern Ontario, and her long-time boyfriend, Ivan Allan.

Mr. Allan, who admitted that his 15-year relationship with Ms. Clibbery was based on nothing more than sex, had asked the court to prohibit his former lover from publicly talking about their rocky breakup.

But in a groundbreaking decision that lifts the veil of secrecy typically associated with English family court, the appeals judges ruled there is nothing to stop a person from disclosing evidence introduced during family hearings that don't involve children.

"I took something for granted that was so important and that's my freedom of speech," Ms. Clibbery, 49, said yesterday from her home in Newmarket, England. "A lot of stuff will come out of this nonsense with my ex-partner, but I hope that is what people get out of it."

The nonsense began at a cocktail party in December, 1985, when Ms. Clibbery first met Mr. Allan, one of the top horse trainers in the world.

A portly man, Mr. Allan had already made millions of dollars on the racing circuit, but his name was familiar to Ms. Clibbery for another reason: The year before, Mr. Allan took five bullets in the back during an assassination attempt in Singapore.

"I remember hearing the news reports about it," Ms. Clibbery said in an interview yesterday. "They said he was dead."

The pair spent most of the evening chatting, Ms. Clibbery remembers, until the 46-year-old offered to drive the young actress home.

The chance meeting turned out to be the beginning of a 15-year relationship in which Ms. Clibbery, originally from Kenora, Ont., enjoyed the vast splendours of wealth and fame. After emigrating to England at age 17 and enjoying a mildly successful stage career, Ms. Clibbery was now drinking champagne cocktails with the country's elite. "I was like Alice in Wonderland," she once said.

Because of his work commitments, Mr. Allan spent much of his time in Hong Kong, but Ms. Clibbery said their bond remained strong even when they were not together.

"He would call me six times a day," said Ms. Clibbery, who spent her time working at the casting agency she founded.

But in the summer of 2000, the relationship came to a halt.

Mr. Allan told his long-time girlfriend he had met a younger woman and he wanted Ms. Clibbery to move out of his London flat, where she had lived with her elderly mother for more than a decade.

Traumatized by the sudden collapse of her love life, Ms. Clibbery filed an occupation order with the High Court of London, which, if granted, would have allowed her to stay in Mr. Allan's apartment.

After an emotional hearing in which Mr. Allan outlined his true feelings for Ms. Clibbery, the judge dismissed her application and ordered her to pay her ex-lover's legal costs, which amounted to more than $250,000.

Unlike Canada, England does not subscribe to the concept of "common-law marriages." If a long-term relationship fails, unmarried couples who live together are not protected by any sort of legislation.

"That's the tragedy of this case," said James Stewart, Ms. Clibbery's lawyer. "Common-law partners have very few rights, so the partner without money is left with nothing."

Amazed that the laws differed so much from Canada, Ms. Clibbery felt she had no choice but to tell her story to the media.

In April of last year, a tabloid in London printed a two-page spread under the headline: "I thought it was love, but I was no more than a sexual servant."

Ms. Clibbery provided the reporter with sworn affidavits that revealed just how little Mr. Allan cared about his long-time girlfriend.

"It is not correct that [Ms. Clibbery] and I have ever lived together as husband and wife," Mr. Allan said. "We share nothing. As unfeeling as it sounds, I paid the Applicant to be at my disposal, in particular for sexual activity."

In other words, Ms. Clibbery said, she was nothing more than a prostitute.

"It was not correct that I have ever loved the Applicant. She knows this," the statement continued. "I have never told her that I loved her and have never used any words of endearment to the Applicant or any phrases which could be construed as being affectionate in any way."

A week after the story appeared, Mr. Allan's lawyers filed an application in the family division of the High Court asking a judge to restrain Ms. Clibbery from revealing details from the original trial.

The judge refused the request, saying the issue "not only goes to the daily practice of the Family Division but, much more fundamentally, it goes to the very root of the proper administration of justice and the right of litigants to talk in public about what has happened to them in court."

An appeal of that ruling was turned down yesterday, opening the door for others to publicly discuss what goes on behind the closed doors of family courts. The decision will also make it easier for anyone to obtain details about a couple's divorce, as long as the breakup does not involve children.

"She has risked everything from a financial point of view to uphold free speech," Mr. Stewart said of his client.

Lawyers for Mr. Allan could not be reached for comment.

Yesterday's decision, although a victory for Ms. Clibbery, does not mark the end of the breakup.

Mr. Allan's lawyers have filed two other court claims, one of which asks a judge to evict Ms. Clibbery and her 75-year-old mother from Mr. Allan's Newmarket home, where the two moved after being evicted from the Mayfair flat.

The second application asks the court to order the return of certain items, including a pornographic movie, that Ms. Clibbery allegedly stole from Mr. Allan.

"If anybody had told me back in Kenora that I'd be caught in this kind of weird situation, I never would have believed them," Ms. Clibbery said. "I now ever regret having met Ivan. At this point in my life, I never want to speak to him again, ever. It's just been so awful."   - by Michael Friscolanti    National Post  

Copyright ©  2008
By opening this page you accept our Privacy and Terms & Conditions