header-logo header-logo

17 November 2017 / David Burrows
Issue: 7770 / Categories: Features , Family
printer mail-detail

Cohabitation in 2017 (Pt 2)

nlj_7770_burrows

In the second of a series of articles, David Burrows explores the complex law which confronts cohabiting couples who separate

  • Can the courts adjust property holding between unmarried couples where title documents define shares?
  • Can a court give an unmarried partner a share in a property held by the other partner?
  • How does equity adjust shares in property occupied by a cohabiting couple?

In ‘Cohabitation in 2017 (Pt 1)’ ( NLJ 3 March 2017, p 11) the discriminatory aspects of cohabitation law in relation to capital adjustment were outlined; but it was pointed out that it relation to children, child maintenance and domestic violence the law was the same for the married and the unmarried. This article (Pt 2) moves on to look at rights which may be acquired in equity by those living together but unmarried. Pt 3 will look at procedural questions and as to how the parties’ capital position is affected if there are children.

Two set of circumstances call for explanation here: first, an unmarried (or not-civil-partnership) couple—hetero-sexual

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