“The recent county court case of Pamela Curran and Brian Collins highlights the difficulties that arise when unmarried couples separate and it should serve as a warning to others in a similar position.”
BBC News, 6th February 2013
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
“Property laws for cohabiting couples are ‘unfair’ on women who are often left with nothing after separating from their partners, an appeal court judge said on Wednesday.”
Daily Telegraph, 23rd January 2013
Source: www.telegraph.co.uk
Gülbahce v Freie und Hansestadt Hamburg (Case C-268/11); [2012] WLR (D) 313
“The first indent of article 6(1) of Decision No 1/80 of the EEC-Turkey Association Council precluded the competent national authorities from withdrawing the residence permit of a Turkish worker with retroactive effect from the point in time at which there was no longer compliance with the ground on the basis of which his residence permit had been issued under national law if there was no question of fraudulent conduct on the part of that worker and that withdrawal occurred after the completion of the period of one year of legal employment provided for in the first indent of article 6(1).”
WLR Daily, 8th November 2012
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
“The purpose of this seminar is to consider the law on constructive trusts following Jones v. Kernott and recent developments regarding cohabiting couples.”
Full story (PDF)
Zenith Chambers, 25th October 2012
Source: www.zenithchambers.co.uk
“Dr John Fox and Eleanor Fletcher, both barristers at Lamb Building, consider the lessons to be learned from the court’s approach to determining the validity of the parties’ marriage in Dukali v Lamrani.”
Family Law Week, 14th August 2012
Source: www.familylawweek.co.uk
“Anna Heenan, solicitor and David Salter, Joint Head of Family Law at Mills & Reeve LLP analyse July’s financial remedies and divorce news and cases.”
Family Law Week, 10th August 2012
Source: www.familylawweek.co.uk
“The law of property, as it applies to cohabiting couples in England and Wales, continues to produce outcomes which many commentators regard as unfair. In the Scottish case of Gow v. Grant, a recent appeal under the Family Law (Scotland) Act 2006 Lady Hale calls for similar legislation to be introduced in England and Wales.”
Full story (PDF)
Zenith Chambers, 17th July 2012
Source: www.zenithchambers.co.uk
“Two million unmarried couples should be given greater legal rights, the country’s top female judge has said.”
Daily Telegraph, 9th July 2012
Source: www.telegraph.co.uk
“In Gow v Grant [2012] UKSC 29, a Scottish cohabitation case, heard in the Supreme Court, Barnoness Hale has said that lessons can be learned in England and Wales from the practicability and fairness provided by Scottish legislation.”
Family Law Week, 5th July 2012
Source: www.familylawweek.com
“The purpose of this article is to consider the law of constructive trusts following Jones v. Kernott [2011] UKSC 53, judgment given on 9th November 2011, insofar as it relates to the purchase of property primarily by cohabitants.”
Full story (PDF)
Zenith Chambers, 27th June 2012
Source: www.zenithchambers.co.uk
“It is only a short time ago since the House of Lords was asked to consider the issue of beneficial interests of an unmarried couple in Stack v Dowden. The recent decision of the Supreme Court in Jones v Kernott highlights again the ongoing problems that can arise when unmarried couples separate and there is no clear agreement as to the ownership of their property interests.”
Hardwicke Chambers, 2nd February 2012
Source: www.hardwicke.co.uk
“Unmarried couples who have lived together for five years or more should be able to inherit from each other without writing a will, the Law Commission has recommended.”
The Guardian, 14th December 2011
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
“Unmarried couples who live together for five years will automatically take their partner’s entire estate if they die without a will, under proposals from the Government’s law advisers.”
Daily Telegraph, 14th December 2011
Source: www.telegraph.co.uk
“Family lawyers have welcomed the Supreme Court’s landmark judgment on the division of assets between former cohabiting couples – but say the case highlights the need for law reform.”
Law Society’s Gazette, 17th November 2011
Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk
“How should the court approach the determination of the beneficial interests in a property acquired in joint names by an unmarried couple? The Court of Appeal had held the decision of the House of Lords in Stack v Dowden did not allow the court to impute to the parties an intention that they would divide their beneficial interest in their property fairly. The Supreme Court revisited the decision in Stack v Dowden and disagreed with the Court of Appeal: If the presumption of joint beneficial ownership is rebutted, the court can, in the absence of finding any intention as to the shares, impute to the parties an intention that their beneficial interest would be divided in a manner that the court considers fair.”
Hardwicke Chambers, 9th November 2011
Source: www.hardwicke.co.uk
“The Jones v Kernott judgment does little to resolve the grey area of ex-cohabitees’ entitlements to a share in their former home.”
The Guardian, 10th November 2011
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
Jones v Kernott [2011] UKSC 53; [2011] WLR (D) 321
“When a cohabiting couple bought a family home in their joint names and were both responsible for the mortgage, but without any express declaration as to their beneficial interests, the starting point was that equity followed the law so that the presumption was that they were joint tenants both in law and in equity. That presumption could be displaced by showing that the parties had a different common intention at the time when they acquired the home or that they later formed a common intention that their respective shares would change. Their common intention was to be deduced objectively from their conduct. If it was clear that the parties did not intend joint tenancy at the outset or had changed their original intention, but it was not possible to ascertain, whether by direct evidence or by inference, what their actual intention was as to the shares in which they owned the property, each was entitled to that share which the court considered fair, having regard to the whole course of the dealing between them in relation to the property.”
WLR Daily, 9th November 2011
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
” Lawyers called today for new legislation on ‘co-habiting couples’ after the UK’s highest court ruled that a man who left his partner nearly 20 years ago was not entitled to half the value of the house they shared.”
The Independent, 9th November 2011
Source: www.independent.co.uk
“The property rights of millions of unmarried couples who split up have been clarified by a supreme court judgment that has awarded the overwhelming share of a bungalow in Essex to the woman.”
The Guardian, 9th November 2011
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
“Statement on the Government’s response to our Cohabitation report.”
Law Commission, 6th September 2011
Source: www.justice.gov.uk/lawcommission
© Inner Temple Library 2024