‘It can often be a difficult and sensitive topic in financial remedy proceedings: what relevance is domestic abuse when considering a fair distribution of assets after separation?’
Becket Chambers, 1st October 2024
Source: becket-chambers.co.uk
‘Since the two seminal decisions of the House of Lords, first in White v White [2000] 2 FLR 981 and then in Miller v Miller; McFarlane v McFarlane [2006] 1 FLR 1186, introduced practitioners to the potentially crucial distinction (in sharing cases, at least) between matrimonial and non-matrimonial property, and the decision of Nicholas Mostyn QC (as he then was) in GW v RW (Financial Provision: Departure from Equality) [2003] 2 FLR 108 introduced into orthodoxy the practice of treating seamless pre-marital cohabitation as, or at least as if it were, part of a marriage, the question of when parties commenced cohabitation has assumed an important significance (although, unlike the ES1, Form E still does not require them to set out when they say that was), alongside the question of when they separated.’
Financial Remedies Journal, 22nd August 2024
Source: financialremediesjournal.com
‘Islington Council has been ordered to pay costs after the dismissal of possession proceedings it brought against a tenant that the council did not consider was in a homosexual relationship with the former tenant, who had passed away.’
Local Government Lawyer, 11th April 2024
Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk
‘To enter the UK as a “partner” under Appendix FM to the Immigration Rules (“FM” being short for “Family Member”), there are three possible ways to qualify as a “partner”. First, as a “spouse”. Second, as a “civil partner”. Third, as an “unmarried partner”.’
Richmond Chambers, 28th February 2024
Source: immigrationbarrister.co.uk
‘What is behind the recent increase in will & inheritance disputes? Niamh Wilkie & Stephanie Coker consider the complications caused by cohabitation & blended families.’
5SAH, 3rd July 2023
Source: www.5sah.co.uk
‘Mattie Green discusses Hudson v Hathway [2022] EWCA Civ 1648, focusing mainly on the application of section 53 of the Law of Property Act 1925.’
Tanfield Chambers, 16th January 2023
Source: www.tanfieldchambers.co.uk
‘The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal, holding that a party claiming a subsequent increase in their equitable share as a result of a post-acquisition changed common intention must show detrimental reliance on the changed common intention. In this case there had been sufficient detrimental reliance.’
Falcon Chambers, 22nd December 2022
Source: www.falcon-chambers.com
‘The ever-troublesome common intention constructive trust (“CICT”) has been back before the Court of Appeal. Hudson v Hathway is a second appeal, from Kerr J. The first appeal was from HHJ Ralton in the County Court at Bristol.’
Guildhall Chambers, 22nd November 2022
Source: www.guildhallchambers.co.uk
‘This is a House of Commons Committee report, with recommendations to government. The Government has two months to respond.’
UK Parliament, 4th August 2022
Source: committees.parliament.uk
‘The government should improve legal protections for unmarried couples by introducing a scheme proposed by the Law Commission 15 years ago, a cross-party group of MPs has recommended.’
Law Society's Gazette, 9th August 2022
Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk
‘Ms Hathway and Mr Hudson started a relationship in 1990. They had two children but did not marry. They bought a family home in joint names, with no declaration of trusts. Both worked, but Mr Hudson substantially paid the mortgage; the amount he contributed exceeded Ms Hathway’s contributions. The parties separated.’
Gatehouse Chambers, 30th March 2022
Source: gatehouselaw.co.uk
‘James Saunders provides in-depth commentary on the recent appeal decision in Hudson v Hathway [2022] EWHC 631 (QB) which considered the role of detriment (or lack thereof) in joint name co-habitation cases. Hudson is important reading for those advising upon trust of land disputes but may need to be viewed cautiously.’
New Square Chambers, 29th March 2022
Source: www.newsquarechambers.co.uk
‘Should cohabiting couples be permitted to bring more comprehensive financial applications to court upon separation? This longstanding discussion amongst family lawyers in England continues and will continue afresh in the wake of the recent House of Commons Briefing Paper “Common law marriage” and Cohabitation published on 4 May 2021.’
Family Law, 31st August 2021
Source: www.familylaw.co.uk
‘The parties became engaged in 2016 married in 2017 and separated in 2019. The parties disagreed over the date of cohabitation, the wife saying 2016 and the husband denying there was any cohabitation before marriage.’
Becket Chambers, 13th August 2021
Source: becket-chambers.co.uk
‘Should cohabiting couples be permitted to bring more comprehensive financial applications to court upon separation? This longstanding discussion amongst family lawyers in England continues and will continue afresh in the wake of the recent House of Commons Briefing Paper “Common law marriage” and Cohabitation published on 4 May 2021.’
Family Law, 8th July 2021
Source: www.familylaw.co.uk
‘Why is it important to show that the parties are “associated persons” for the purposes of FLA 1996 (FLA 1996)?’
Becket Chambers, 17th June 2021
Source: becket-chambers.co.uk
‘Many couples, despite living together, never seek to legally formalise their living and financial arrangements. They mistakenly believe that the concept of a “common law” husband and wife applies to them namely that they will automatically have financial claims against each other simply because they live together. The reality is far from this. Cohabitants do not have the same financial protection and security on the breakdown of their relationship as is afforded to married couples/those in civil partnerships.’
Family Law, 26th February 2021
Source: www.familylaw.co.uk
‘Historically, cohabitation agreements, sometimes known as “no-Nups”, were frowned upon as they were seen to encourage sexual relations outside of marriage. Thankfully, times have moved on and that’s no longer the case. The general view is that such agreements are enforceable if they deal with cohabitees’ property and affairs, and provided they are entered into freely with full information. Often, disputes between cohabitees following separation relate to what was or wasn’t intended, for example, in relation to the property in which they live. Having a clear record of the cohabitees’ intentions in a cohabitation agreement can avoid expensive disputes about those issues.’
Family Law, 30th September 2020
Source: www.familylaw.co.uk
‘Under the Immigration Rules, a person who is British or Settled in the UK can bring their unmarried partner to the UK. This is sometimes referred to as a ‘partner visa’ or ‘de facto visa’. This is an option that more couples are currently considering, partly due to the ongoing restrictions around the world on wedding ceremonies due to covid-19.’
Richmond Chambers, 1st May 2020
Source: immigrationbarrister.co.uk
‘Going through a divorce can be an overwhelming process whereby those involved are seeking answers and security during a time of uncertainty. Questions often asked by divorcing spouses signing up to spousal maintenance orders in favour of their soon-to-be former spouse may be, “what happens if they cohabit? How does cohabitation affect divorce settlement? Surely I will not have to continue to pay maintenance in these circumstances?”. And the answer is that you might. Cohabitation after divorce and cohabitation before divorce is final do not necessarily have bearing on spousal maintenance payments, division of goods, or their rights in a divorce, unless clearly stipulated in your court order.’
St Paul's Chambers, 23rd April 2020
Source: www.stpaulschambers.com
© Inner Temple Library 2024