Child maintenance, the CSA and the quality of mercy Adultery, divorce and a modern-day “epidemic”
Jan 23

It is worrying that so few cohabitants have taken steps to safeguard their positions.

Cohabitation remains a popular choice of relationship in Britain. More than one third of people (36 per cent) have cohabited in the past, and one in nine (11 per cent) do so at present.

Unfortunately, my office is frequently consulted by an increasing number of cohabitants who have learned, to their great shock, that they have no legal remedy following the breakdown of their relationships.

In the midst of separation, a cohabiting couple experiences the same emotional turmoil as a married couple going through a divorce. Even so, there is little - if anything - that the law can do for them.

Gay couples entering into Civil Partnerships have the same rights as married couples. However, heterosexual couples who choose not to marry, or who may not be able to marry, have no automatic rights in law. 

Four years ago, the government launched a high-profile media campaign to raise awareness about this. Unfortunately, a new report has revealed that many in the UK remain confused about the legal consequences of living together outside of marriage.

The latest British Social Attitudes study, published by the National Centre for Social Research, shows that more than half of adults (51 per cent) still hold the mistaken belief that there is such a thing as “common law marriage”‘, which gives cohabitants the same rights as married couples.

The other findings include:

  • Four out of ten of us (38 per cent) know that “common law marriages” have no legal status. However, this figure has barely risen since 2000 - and it would appear that the government’s publicity efforts have had little success.
  • Cohabitants are no more knowledgeable than others. Fifty-three per cent believe that common law marriage exists. Just 39 per cent know that it does not.

Most worrying of all, few cohabitants have taken steps to safeguard their positions:

  • Just one in six (15 per cent) of those who own their homes have a written agreement about their share in the ownership.
  • Just one in five (19 per cent) have sought advice about their legal position.

The report also suggests that there is strong public support for legal reform so that in certain circumstances, cohabiting couples would be treated the same as married couples.

  • Nine out of ten people (89 per cent) believe that a cohabiting partner should have a right to financial provision on separation if the relationship has been long-term, includes children and has involved prioritising one partner’s career over another.
  • Four out of ten people (38%) believe that a cohabiting partner should have a right to financial provision if the relationship only lasted two years and involves no children.

Anne Barlow, a professor of law at the University of Exeter and a co-author of the study, has concluded: “There is little appetite for maintaining the deep legal divisions drawn between married and unmarried cohabiting families. The Law Commission should bear this in mind in their review of current legislation.”

As one of the members of the Advisory Group to the Law Commission, I wholeheartedly agree with Professor Barlow. The Law Commission - an independent body set up by Parliament to review and recommend reform of the law in England and Wales - has been asked to consider this subject and has already submitted a sensible report to the government.

In its report, the Law Commission does not equate cohabitation with marriage, but proposes a system of compensation to cohabitants who have suffered economic loss as a result of the relationship. The proposals address the issue of economic imbalance - for example, if one cohabiting partner had given up work to care for the couple’s children. 

This approach is sensitive to those who believe that marriage is something more than cohabitation, yet remedies the substantial injustices that are prevalent at present.

I only hope the government has the stomach for what will undoubtedly be a rough ride through Parliament and in the media, as cohabitation is fair game for those who like to bang their drums and ignore reality. There is no point pretending that cohabitation does not exist. It does, and it affects many millions of people here in the UK. The sooner we have some good laws in place, the better.




Related Posts

Here is a list of other related blog posts that you may be interested in:

3 Responses to “Cohabitation and the “common law marriage” myth”

  1. sally Says:

    People do not realise that the marriage certificate is so much more than a piece of paper. It is documented proof that- at some point- the couple declared their intention to commit to one another in front of witnesses. If a cohabiting relationship breaks down, if it suits them one of the cohabitees can claim that they were just very good friends living under one roof. OK if they have children together this argument may seem a little strained. But if they have no children then they could very well have been just good friends. There is no legal definition of what cohabitation means. Having that marriage certificiate is very, very important. Frankly, those that believe it is “just a piece of paper” are fools I learnt this through bitter experience- for 10 years ago I was one of those fools. I will never make that mistake again.

  2. rameshraju Says:

    Co-habitation is a form of prostitution. Co-habitation is highly fragile relationship between man and a woman. Co-habitation lacks commitment. Blood relationship is very weak in co-habitation. Co-habitation cannot build healthy society or healthy family system. Co-habitation is just like room mates living in a room. Children are the sufferers in co-habitation. Co-habitaion is the tradition designed by the devil. Sexual relationships are weaker in co-habitation. Co-habitation should be considered as a crime or illegal one by the court of law. Divorce cases are mostly found in Co-habitation. Cohabitation is the result of birth of individualism in men and women. Co-habitation leads to many disasters in human society. Cohabitation is an unsecured one, even more than marriage system. Marriage system is always secured more than co-habitation.

  3. Ramesh Raju Says:

    Co-habitation is a form of high-tech ADULTERY. Co-habitation is highly fragile relationship between man and a woman. Co-habitation lacks commitment. Blood relationship is very weak in co-habitation. Co-habitation cannot build healthy society or healthy family system. It ruins the actual family system. Co-habitation is just like room mates living in a room. Children are the ultimate sufferers in co-habitation. Co-habitaion is the tradition designed by the devil of individualism. Sexual relationships are weaker in co-habitation. Co-habitation should be considered as a crime or illegal one by the court of law. Divorce cases are mostly found in Co-habitation. Cohabitation is the result of birth of individualism in men and women. Co-habitation leads to many disasters in human society. Cohabitation is an unsecured one, even more than marriage system. Marriage system is always secured more than co-habitation. It is pity that Bharatmata is being gang-raped by some IT professionals in the name of co-habitation, pub culture, immodest fashion, dating etc.

Leave a Reply

If you wish to contact Marilyn Stowe, please visit the contact page.