“Outdated family laws have fuelled an ‘alarming’ rise in marital breakdown, causing ‘profound’ damage to millions of children, a High Court judge has warned.”
Daily Telegraph, 11th May 2011
Source: www.telegraph.co.uk
“A bungalow in Essex is at the heart of a test case over how unmarried partners who split up should divide their property.”
The Guardian, 4th May 2011
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
“The Supreme Court is hearing a case which could have a dramatic effect on the property rights of unmarried couples who split up.”
BBC News, 4th May 2011
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
“Cohabiting couples who split up should get new legal rights to share property and money, according to Britain’s most senior family judge.”
Daily Telegraph, 3rd February 2011
Source: www.telegraph.co.uk
“The recession has caused an ‘explosion’ in the number of cohabiting couples seeking advice on relationship breakdown, according to family lawyers who have called for the ‘complex’ laws applied to them to be updated.”
Full story
Law Society’s Gazette, 6th August 2010
Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk
Jones v Kernott [2010] EWCA Civ 578; [2010] WLR (D) 13
“Where the parties had agreed when they separated that they had equal interests in a residential property conveyed into their joint names there had to be something to displace those interests before the court could impute from the parties’ conduct an intention to vary that equality. The passage of time was insufficient to do so even if in the meantime the defendant had acquired alternative accommodation and the claimant had paid all the outgoings.”
WLR Daily, 27th May 2010
Source: www.lawreports.co.uk
Please note once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.
Jones v Kernott [2010] EWCA Civ 578; [2010] WLR (D) 136
“Where the parties had agreed when they separated that they had equal interests in a residential property conveyed into their joint names there had to be something to displace those interests before the court could impute from the parties’ conduct an intention to vary that equality. The passage of time was insufficient to do so even if in the meantime the defendant had acquired alternative accommodation and the claimant had paid all the outgoings.”
WLR Daily, 27th May 2010
Source: www.lawreports.co.uk
Please note once a case has been reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.
“Unmarried couples who buy homes together could be entitled to an equal share of the property if they split up even if only one party has paid the mortgage and maintained the home, the appeal court ruled yesterday.”
The Independent, 27th May 2010
Source: www.independent.co.uk
“Extending property rights to those who move in together, but don’t marry, will only lead to heartbreak and pain for the young.”
The Guardian, 22nd November 2009
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
“Pre-nuptial agreements would be legally binding, and cohabiting couples would not have the same rights as those who marry, under Tory plans for strengthening marriage unveiled today.”
The Guardian, 17th November 2008
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
“A government delay on new rights for cohabiting couples has been slammed by family lawyers.”
BBC News, 8th March 2008
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
“Justice Minister Bridget Prentice has made a written ministerial statement announcing the government’s response to the Law Commission’s paper on the financial consequences of relationship breakdown for cohabiting couples.”
Ministry of Justice, 6th March 2008
Source: www.justice.gov.uk
“Plans to give two million cohabiting partners similar rights to married couples have been shelved by ministers.”
The Times, 7th March 2008
Source: www.timesonline.co.uk
Laskar v Laskar; [2008] WLR (D) 39
“The presumption that the legal and beneficial interests of a domestic property conveyed into joint names were, in the absence of an agreement between the parties, joint and equal applied to a family home occupied by cohabitants. The presumption did not apply to commercial properties or to property purchased as an investment even where the purchasers belonged to the same family.”
WLR Daily, 8th February 2008
Source: www.lawreports.co.uk
Please note once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.
“Blackburn-based firm Haworth & Nuttall has claimed that changes to cohabitation laws will ‘fall at the first hurdle’ due to extra costs.”
The Lawyer, 5th September 2007
Source: www.thelawyer.com
“Plans to give unmarried couples improved rights on the breakdown of their relationship highlight how worried the Government is about changes in society that leave many women and their children in deep financial trouble once a partnership breaks down. But for many who plan to co-own property, any change to the law (which is not expected to happen quickly) will not necessarily help them.”
The Times, 7th August 2007
Source: www.timesonline.co.uk
“Couples who are living together should have more legal rights, according to a report from the Law Commission.”
BBC News, 30th July 2007
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
“The report contains final recommendations regarding the law as it affects cohabitants’ property and finances when their relationships end, whether by separation or by death.”
Law Commission, 31st July 2007
Source: www.lawcom.gov.uk
“Cohabiting couples would be entitled to financial settlements if they split up, under proposals from the Government’s key adviser on law reform.”
The Times, 31st July 2007
Source: www.timesonline.co.uk
“A powerful group of family solicitors is calling on the Government to make a commitment to giving cohabiting couples new financial protection if they split up, and to make time for an early Bill.”
The Times, 30th July 2007
Source: www.timesonline.co.uk
© Inner Temple Library 2025