header-logo header-logo

16 March 2007 / David Allison
Issue: 7264 / Categories: Features
printer mail-detail

All change?

Cohabitants have waited too long for justice, says
David Allison

The law has been letting down cohabitants for much too long. It was over 20 years ago that the injustices suffered by so many cohabitants was highlighted in Burns v Burns [1984] 1 All ER 244, [1984] 2 WLR 582. Mrs Burns (so called) lived with Mr Burns for 19 years and they had two children. They lived as a family and pooled their resources but, when their relationship broke down, Mrs Burns was entitled to nothing. She was not entitled to an interest in their home because the court could not find evidence of a common intention of joint ownership, either by agreement or by virtue of financial contributions to the purchase price of the property or the mortgage. The court could not, therefore, construe a trust in her favour. Because she was not married, the court did not have the jurisdiction to consider what she might reasonably need or expect.

Although the number of people living in cohabiting relationships has continued to grow the law

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Haynes Boone—Jeremy Cross

Haynes Boone—Jeremy Cross

Firm strengthens global fund finance practice with London partner hire.

DWF—Stephen Webb

DWF—Stephen Webb

Partner and head of national planning team appointed

mfg Solicitors—Nick Little

mfg Solicitors—Nick Little

Corporate team expands in Birmingham with partner hire

NEWS
Contract damages are usually assessed at the date of breach—but not always. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Gascoigne, knowledge lawyer at LexisNexis, examines the growing body of cases where courts have allowed later events to reshape compensation
The Supreme Court has restored ‘doctrinal coherence’ to unfair prejudice litigation, writes Natalie Quinlivan, partner at Fieldfisher LLP, in this week' NLJ
The High Court’s refusal to recognise a prolific sperm donor as a child’s legal parent has highlighted the risks of informal conception arrangements, according to Liam Hurren, associate at Kingsley Napley, in NLJ this week
The Court of Appeal’s decision in Mazur may have settled questions around litigation supervision, but the profession should not simply ‘move on’, argues Jennifer Coupland, CEO of CILEX, in this week's NLJ
A simple phrase like ‘subject to references’ may not protect employers as much as they think. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, analyses recent employment cases showing how conditional job offers can still create binding contracts
back-to-top-scroll