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

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

Nikki Bowker, head of litigation and dispute resolution at Devonshires, on career resilience, diversity in law and channelling Elle Woods when the pressure is on

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Leasehold enfranchisement specialist joins residential property team

DWF—Chris Air

DWF—Chris Air

Firm strengthens commercial team in Manchester with partner appointment

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