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

Bell Yard Kysen—Liz Giles

Bell Yard Kysen—Liz Giles

Bell Yard Kysen appoints senior legal PR and ex-government communications adviser, Liz Giles

Clarke Willmott—Lee Edwards

Clarke Willmott—Lee Edwards

Clarke Willmott boosts Southampton commercial property team with addition of partner Lee Edwards

Lime Solicitors—four promotions

Lime Solicitors—four promotions

Lime Solicitors announces four promotions

NEWS
The Attorney General, Ellie Reeves KC MP, and Solicitor General, Andy Slaughter KC MP, marked the 25th anniversary of Pro Bono Week by joining lawyers, charities, students and parliamentarians at events celebrating voluntary legal work
Witness evidence can be compromised by AI before a solicitor sees the draft, leaving safeguards focused on authorship incomplete
Possession claims are entering a new digital era, with procedural traps awaiting practitioners who assume familiar rules still govern every step
A polished legal defence may owe more to artificial intelligence than legal merit—and creditors risk paying the price in delay and expense
An indemnity costs battle with a £20m gap could reopen an important question: what weight should an approved budget carry?
back-to-top-scroll