header-logo header-logo

22 November 2013 / Edward Heaton
Issue: 7585 / Categories: Features , Family
printer mail-detail

What’s mine is mine...

Ed Heaton explores the rights of cohabitants

In her recently published article in NLJ, Geraldine Morris considered the approach of the courts to periods of cohabitation within the context of divorce proceedings (both cohabitation between the parties prior to their marriage and the cohabitation of one of the parties with a third party post separation). This article will look at the stark contrast between the positions of cohabitants upon separation and those of spouses upon divorce.

In her article, Ms Morris referred to the case of GW v RW [2003] 2 FCR 289, [2003] All ER (D) 40 (May). In his judgment in that case, Nicholas Mostyn QC, sitting as a Deputy High Court Judge, (as he then was) held that, where a relationship had moved seamlessly from cohabitation to marriage, it was artificial to treat the periods differently. In practice, therefore, any period of pre-marital cohabitation is likely to be added to the term of a marriage for the purposes of measuring the length of the marriage, something which is often

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

Weightmans—Jason Slatcher

Weightmans—Jason Slatcher

Weightmans appoint new Chief Technology Officer

Mishcon de Reya—trainees

Mishcon de Reya—trainees

Mishcon de Reya announces trainee retention rate of 86%

Sackers—Charlotte Adams & Fraser Sutton

Sackers—Charlotte Adams & Fraser Sutton

Sackers welcomes two new Graduate Solicitor Apprentices

NEWS
LexisNexis is delighted to announce the launch of the LexisNexis Legal Awards 2027, celebrating outstanding achievement, innovation and impact across the legal profession
The Legal Services Board (LSB) is to take further enforcement action against the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA), setting additional performance targets and ‘intensifying’ its oversight, it has said
Regulators missed several opportunities to intervene in PM Law Group before it collapsed, an independent review by City firm Jenner & Block has found
An employer’s vicarious liability for the alleged torts of an employee cannot be transferred by TUPE, the Court of Appeal has confirmed
Tiered fees of up to £1,500 for Legal Ombudsman (LeO) cases could leave firms with little option but to pay out, lawyers have warned
back-to-top-scroll