header-logo header-logo

02 August 2007
Issue: 7284 / Categories: Legal News , Divorce , Family
printer mail-detail

Legal remedies for unmarried couples who separate

News

Couples who live together and then break up should not be given the same rights as married couples and civil partners, the Law Commission says. However, unmarried couples with children or who have been together for a certain period of time should be given certain rights to property, money and possessions.

In a report published this week, Cohabitation: the Financial Consequences of Relationship Breakdown, the commissioners reject calls for equality of rights and instead recommend introducing a scheme of financial remedies on separation for cohabitants and their families.

The commissioners’ proposed reforms would apply only to cohabiting couples who have had a child together, or who have cohabited for an as yet unspecified minimum period of somewhere between two to five years. Couples would be free to opt out by a written agreement.

Financial remedies would reflect the parties’ contribution to the relationship, and priority would be given to any dependent children. There would be no concept of maintenance payments and no principle of equal share of assets.
Stuart Bridge, the commissioner leading the project, says: “The scheme we are recommending, in the light of consultation, is distinct from that which applies between spouses on divorce.

“It would not apply to all cohabitants and where it did apply would only give rise to remedies relating to contributions made to the relationship. We do not accept the argument that such reform would undermine marriage.
“We consider that our scheme strikes the right balance between the need to alleviate hardship and the need to protect couples’ freedom of choice.”
According to family lawyers group Resolution, the number of cohabiting households is predicted to grow from one in six to one in four by 2031. More than 70% of family lawyers surveyed by Resolution back the case for urgent reform, stating that the law fails cohabiting couples when they separate.
Julian Washington, partner at Forsters LLP, says: “The powerful and persistent myth of ‘common law marriage’ is a major cause of injustice for families. The Law Commission’s proposals are a fair and proportionate response to this problem.”

However, James Freeman, family law solicitor at Speechly Bircham LLP, warns: “There are likely to be problems with this proposed new system, not least the unpleasant prospect of litigation over what decisions and contributions were made over the course of a long unmarried relationship. It also remains to be seen whether the political will is there to make these proposals into law.”

Issue: 7284 / Categories: Legal News , Divorce , Family
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Laytons ETL—Maximilian Kraitt

Laytons ETL—Maximilian Kraitt

Commercial firm strengthens real estate disputes team with associate hire

Switalskis—three appointments

Switalskis—three appointments

Firm appoints three directors to board

Browne Jacobson—seven promotions

Browne Jacobson—seven promotions

Six promoted to partner and one to legal director across UK and Ireland offices

NEWS

From blockbuster judgments to procedural shake-ups, the courts are busy reshaping litigation practice. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School hails the Court of Appeal's 'exquisite judgment’ in Mazur restoring the role of supervised non-qualified staff, and highlights a ‘mammoth’ damages ruling likened to War and Peace, alongside guidance on medical reporting fees, where a pragmatic 25% uplift was imposed

Momentum is building behind proposals to restrict children’s access to social media—but the legal and practical challenges are formidable. In NLJ this week, Nick Smallwood of Mills & Reeve examines global moves, including Australia’s under-16 ban and the UK's consultation
Reforms designed to rebalance landlord-tenant relations may instead penalise leaseholders themselves. In this week's NLJ, Mike Somekh of The Freehold Collective warns that the Leasehold and Freehold Reform Act 2024 risks creating an ‘underclass’ of resident-controlled freehold companies
Timing is everything—and the Court of Appeal has delivered clarity on when proceedings are ‘brought’. In his latest 'Civil way' column for NLJ, Stephen Gold explains that a claim is issued for limitation purposes when the claim form is delivered to the court, even if fees are underpaid
The traditional ‘single, intensive day’ of financial dispute resolution (FDR) may be due for a rethink. Writing in NLJ this week, Rachel Frost-Smith and Lauren Guiler of Birketts propose a ‘split FDR’ model, separating judicial evaluation from negotiation
back-to-top-scroll