# Same-sex marriage in Quebec

Part of the LGBTQ rights series :
Legal status of same-sex unions :
Marriage
Andorra
Argentina
Australia
Austria
Belgium
Brazil
Canada
Chile
Colombia
Costa Rica
Cuba
Denmark
Ecuador
Estonia
Finland
France
Germany
Greece
Iceland
Ireland
Liechtenstein
Luxembourg
Malta
Mexico
Netherlands
New Zealand
Norway
Portugal
Slovenia
South Africa
Spain
Sweden
Switzerland
Taiwan
Thailand
United Kingdom
United States
Uruguay
Recognized
Israel
United States:
 • American Samoa :
Civil unions or registered partnerships but not marriage
Bolivia
Croatia
Cyprus
Czech Republic
Hungary
Italy
Latvia
Monaco
Montenegro
San Marino
United Kingdom:
 • Bermuda
 • Cayman Islands :
Minimal recognition
Bulgaria
Cambodia
China
 • Hong Kong
India
Japan
Lithuania
Namibia
Nepal
Netherlands:
 • Sint Maarten
Poland
Romania
Slovakia :
See also
Same-sex union legislation
Same-sex union court cases
Timeline of same-sex marriage
Recognition of same-sex unions in Africa
Recognition of same-sex unions in Asia
Recognition of same-sex unions in Europe
Recognition of same-sex unions in the Americas
Recognition of same-sex unions in Oceania
Marriage privatization
Divorce of same-sex couples
Domestic partnership
Military policy
Adoption
Listings by country
LGBTQ rights by country or territory :
Notes
1 2 Performed in the Netherlands proper (including the Caribbean Netherlands), as well as in Aruba and Curaçao. May be registered in Sint Maarten in such cases, but the rights of marriage are not guaranteed.
↑ Neither performed nor recognized in Niue, Tokelau, or the Cook Islands.
↑ Neither performed nor recognized in six British Overseas Territories.
1 2 Neither performed nor recognized in some tribal nations of the US. Recognized but not performed in several other tribal nations and American Samoa.
↑ Registered foreign marriages confer all marriage rights in Israel. Domestic common-law marriages confer most rights of marriage. Domestic civil marriage recognized by some cities.
1 2 3 4 5 The Coman v. Romania ruling of the European Court of Justice obliges the state to provide residency rights for the foreign spouses of EU citizens. Some member states, including Romania, do not follow the ruling.
↑ A "declaration of family relationship" is available in several of Cambodia's communes which may be useful in matters such as housing, but is not legally binding.
↑ Guardianship agreements confer some limited legal benefits in China, including decisions about medical and personal care.
↑ Hong Kong provides inheritance, guardianship rights, and residency rights for foreign spouses of legal residents.
↑ Indian courts have recognised guru–shishya, nata pratha or maitri karar–type contractual relationships, but they are not legally binding.
↑ Most Japanese cities and prefectures issue partnership certificates, but they are not legally binding.
↑ Marriages conducted abroad between a Namibian national and a foreign spouse provide residency rights in Namibia.
↑ Romania provides hospital visitation rights through a "legal representative" status. :
LGBTQ portal :
vte :
Same-sex marriage has been legal in Quebec since March 19, 2004 in accordance with a ruling from the Quebec Court of Appeal that the heterosexual definition of marriage violated the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Quebec was the third Canadian province after Ontario and British Columbia and the fifth jurisdiction in the world to open marriage to same-sex couples.

## Court ruling

In 2000, Michael Hendricks and René Leboeuf applied for a marriage licence, but were turned down by a clerk who read out the sections of provincial law that defined marriage as being between "a man and a woman". After the rejection, they filed suit against the Government of Quebec, alleging that its refusal to perform and recognise same-sex marriage violated the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (Charte canadienne des droits et libertés). Two conservative organisations, the Evangelical Fellowship of Canada and the Catholic Civil Rights League, were granted intervenor status in the case, Hendricks and Leboeuf v. Quebec. The lawsuit was heard in the Quebec Superior Court on 8, 9, 12, 13, 14, 15 and 16 November 2001. The provincial and federal governments had initially opposed the court bid; provincial Attorney General Paul Bégin argued that "gays and lesbians were not suffering any form of discrimination in [Quebec]", while federal Attorney General Anne McLellan argued that the definition of marriage was at the Parliament of Canada's discretion and not a matter for the courts to decide. A lawyer representing the conservative religious groups argued that if the court ruled in favor of same-sex marriage "[h]is heterosexual clients would no longer be able to marry. That is because, to them, marriage is a heterosexual institution." Daniel Cere, a Catholic professor at McGill University, who filed an affidavit for the court, said that same-sex marriage "would fracture the basis of shared religious and civil peace in the province". Rabbi David Novak also filed an affidavit for the court, stating that same-sex marriage would "create a schism between Jews and the rest of society", and said that Judaism "expect[ed] them [gay people] to remain celibate for life". Other affidavits from religious groups included one from an anonymous Muslim imam, stating that same-sex marriage "would invalidate Muslim beliefs, preventing Muslims from full participation in Canadian society", while one from a conservative Protestant professor at Regent College said that same-sex marriage "would drive a stake into the heart of Protestant beliefs".
Attorney Noël Saint-Pierre argued that denying marriage rights to same-sex couples constituted unfair discrimination as they were unable to access many legal benefits often taken for granted by married opposite-sex couples, such as alimony, immigration rights, child support, hospital visitation rights, and protection from domestic violence, among others. Saint-Pierre also refuted the religious groups' claims, citing the Netherlands, where same-sex marriage has been legal since 2001: "The fears of the religious conservatives did not materialize. Christians did not stop marrying. Jews did not flee the country." Judge Louise Lemelin ruled in the couple's favour on September 6, 2002. The court gave the federal government two years in which to modify federal law to allow gays and lesbians to marry. A lawyer representing the plaintiff couple told the Montreal Gazette:
   What makes the Quebec victory important for all of Canada is that [Judge Lemelin] had the chance to look at a civil-union law and to comment herself as to whether that would be enough of a solution for gay and lesbian couples. But Judge Lemelin said in very strong terms that a civil union, as wonderful as it is because of all the economic rights that it gives, is still not marriage.
The federal government filed an appeal of the decision of the Superior Court on September 9, 2002, but abandoned that appeal in 2003, the year same-sex marriage was legalized in Ontario and British Columbia. The case continued, with the group of religious conservatives opposing the plaintiffs' claims. The group argued that the legalisation of same-sex marriage was unconstitutional under the Constitution Act, 1867, would prevent heterosexual couples from marrying and would "weaken the meaning of marriage". On March 19, 2004, the Quebec Court of Appeal ruled similarly to the Ontario and British Columbia courts, upholding Hendricks and Leboeuf in a unanimous 5–0 vote, and ordering that it take effect immediately. Hendricks and Leboeuf immediately sought a marriage licence; the usual 20-day waiting period was waived, and they were wed on April 1 at the Palais de justice in Montreal. Hendricks said, "The floodgates seem to be open and it looks like Canada is going to become the first North American country that has equal marriage... This is wonderful." Following the court decision, provincial Attorney General Marc Bellemare announced that the government would abide by the ruling. The Quebec decision meant that more than two-thirds of the Canadian population were living in provinces where same-sex marriage is legal. Subsequent cases, as well as federal legislation, have expanded this number to cover the entire country.

## Provincial legislation
### Civil unions

In 2002, the National Assembly of Quebec unanimously passed a bill legalising civil unions for both same-sex and opposite-sex partners, offering many of the same rights, benefits and responsibilities as marriage, including the right to adopt children jointly. Civil unions are performed by court clerks, notaries, mayors, members of municipal councils or borough councils, municipal officials or authorised religious officiants. Once the document is signed by both partners and the witnesses, the union is formally registered with the Director of Civil Status. Quebec civil unions are not recognised in other parts of Canada or other countries.

### Marriage

In November 2004, the National Assembly enacted An Act to amend the Civil Code as regards marriage (French: Loi modifiant le Code civil relativement au mariage), amending the Civil Code of Quebec to replace references to "husband and wife" with "spouses" and permit civil unions to be converted to marriages. Quebec became the first province in Canada to bring its laws in line with the legalisation of same-sex marriage and add a gender-neutral definition of spouse in its marriage laws.

## Marriage and civil union statistics

From 2004 to 2023, 11,087 same-sex marriages were performed in Quebec, representing about 2.5% of all marriages contracted during that time. There were also 1,282 same-sex civil unions performed during this same time period, representing about 20% of all civil unions.
Between 2004 and 2008, 17% of same-sex marriages were between couples from other provinces or territories, or from the United States. The following table shows the number of marriages and civil unions performed in Quebec as per data published by the Institut de la statistique du Québec. Figures for 2020 and 2021 are lower than previous years because of the restrictions in place due to the COVID-19 pandemic.
Number of marriages and civil unions performed in Quebec :
| Year | Same-sex marriages | Same-sex marriages | Same-sex marriages | Total marriages | % same-sex | Same-sex civil unions | Same-sex civil unions | Same-sex civil unions | Total unions | % same-sex |
| Year | Female | Male | Total | Total marriages | % same-sex | Female | Male | Total | Total unions | % same-sex |
| 2002 | – | – | – | – | – | 69 | 87 | 156 | 166 | 94.0% |
| 2003 | – | – | – | – | – | 134 | 140 | 274 | 342 | 80.1% |
| 2004 | 97 | 148 | 245 | 21,279 | 1.15% | 31 | 48 | 79 | 179 | 44.1% |
| 2005 | 173 | 278 | 451 | 22,244 | 2.03% | 24 | 35 | 59 | 172 | 34.3% |
| 2006 | 272 | 349 | 621 | 21,956 | 2.83% | 19 | 34 | 53 | 216 | 24.5% |
| 2007 | 216 | 251 | 467 | 22,147 | 2.11% | 17 | 26 | 43 | 241 | 17.8% |
| 2008 | 186 | 262 | 448 | 22,053 | 2.03% | 25 | 44 | 69 | 270 | 25.6% |
| 2009 | 222 | 291 | 513 | 22,588 | 2.27% | 26 | 28 | 54 | 239 | 22.6% |
| 2010 | 234 | 281 | 515 | 23,199 | 2.22% | 19 | 36 | 55 | 280 | 19.6% |
| 2011 | 256 | 237 | 493 | 22,903 | 2.15% | 27 | 32 | 59 | 240 | 24.6% |
| 2012 | 259 | 255 | 514 | 23,504 | 2.19% | 26 | 33 | 59 | 288 | 20.5% |
| 2013 | 306 | 286 | 592 | 23,181 | 2.55% | 23 | 27 | 50 | 290 | 17.2% |
| 2014 | 291 | 286 | 577 | 22,429 | 2.57% | 20 | 17 | 37 | 240 | 15.4% |
| 2015 | 285 | 315 | 600 | 22,441 | 2.67% | 15 | 22 | 37 | 228 | 16.2% |
| 2016 | 317 | 343 | 660 | 21,958 | 3.01% | 13 | 13 | 26 | 223 | 11.7% |
| 2017 | 336 | 343 | 679 | 22,883 | 2.97% | 17 | 22 | 39 | 219 | 17.8% |
| 2018 | 385 | 323 | 708 | 22,841 | 3.10% | 18 | 17 | 35 | 237 | 14.8% |
| 2019 | 365 | 317 | 682 | 22,284 | 3.06% | 13 | 20 | 33 | 207 | 16.4% |
| 2020 | 192 | 206 | 398 | 11,326 | 3.51% | 7 | 12 | 19 | 119 | 16.0% |
| 2021 | 245 | 245 | 490 | 14,708 | 3.33% | 5 | 8 | 13 | 117 | 11.1% |
| 2022 | 371 | 331 | 704 | 22,908 | 3.07% | 8 | 11 | 19 | 122 | 15.6% |
| 2023 | 375 | 355 | 730 | 26,688 | 3.22% | 6 | 8 | 14 | 108 | 13.0% |

## Religious performance

Several dioceses of the Anglican Church of Canada allow their clergy to bless and perform same-sex marriages. In 2008, the synod of the Diocese of Montreal voted to allow its parishes to bless same-sex unions. The measure includes a freedom of conscience clause for clergy opposed to blessing same-sex unions. In July 2016, Bishop Mary Irwin-Gibson said she would allow her clergy to perform same-sex marriages. The Diocese of Ottawa, which encompasses parts of western Quebec, including the Outaouais region, has also allowed solemnisations of same-sex marriages since 2016. The Diocese of Quebec has allowed blessings of same-sex unions since 2012. Bishop Bruce Myers expressed disappointment in July 2019 when the Anglican Church of Canada narrowly rejected a motion to approve same-sex marriage. On 24 November 2019, the synod of the Diocese of Quebec voted 37–6 to request Bishop Myers to authorise the solemnisation of same-sex marriages. In response to the request, Myers said, "You'll here more from me, because… what this motion also expects is that I will come back to the diocese with some specifics around how such a request would be implemented, and being clear about things like safeguards for those who do not wish to exercise and offer this ministry." On the other hand, same-sex marriages are not performed in the Diocese of Moosonee, which encompasses the northwestern Eeyou Istchee communities. The marriage canon of the Anglican Church of Canada serves as the canon on marriage in the diocese. Similarly, the Diocese of The Arctic, encompassing the northern Nunavik region, does not allow its parishes to perform same-sex marriages.
Some other religious organisations also perform same-sex marriages in their places of worship, including the United Church of Canada, Quakers, the Evangelical Lutheran Church in Canada, and the Canadian Unitarian Council.

## Public opinion

A 2017 CROP poll showed that Quebec had the highest popular support for same-sex marriage in Canada, at 80%. Nationwide, 74% of Canadians found it "great that in Canada, two people of the same sex can get married", while 26% disagreed.