Chester 01244 405 555

Grosvenor Court
Foregate Street Chester
Cheshire CH1 1HG
DX: 19990 Chester

Shrewsbury 01743 443 043

Lakeside House
Oxon Business Park
Shrewsbury SY3 5HJ
DX: 148563 Shrewsbury 14

Manchester 0844 800 8346

Pall Mall Court
61-67 King Street
Manchester M2 4PD

Send us a message
  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Our Offices

Aaron & Partners supports call to better protect rights of unmarried couples

28th November, 2017

Aaron & Partners is backing National Cohabitation Awareness Week (Nov 27 – Dec 1).

The campaign is designed to raise awareness of the lack of legal protection for cohabiting couples.

Aaron & Partners LLP is throwing its weight behind a national campaign calling for better protection for the rights of cohabiting couples.

The firm’s Family Law team wants to ‘bust the myth’ that unmarried couples living together have equivalent rights to married couples through ‘common law’ and is calling on the Government to offer more protection to those couples who live together but decide not to tie the knot.

Cohabiting couple families were the fastest growing family type between 1996 and 2016, more than doubling from 1.5 million families to 3.3 million families. The trends for Cheshire and Shropshire mirror the national picture.

But according to Sandy Edwards, a Senior Associate from Aaron & Partners’ Family Law team in Shrewsbury, this has exposed a fundamental gap within the law.

She said: “Many cohabitees are surprised to learn upon separation that it isn’t a case of all the parties’ assets or income being available to divide.’ Cohabitees don’t have the same rights as married couples and there is certainly no protection in the myth of being a “common law” spouse.

“Generally, the main asset held by a couple is their home but even if a cohabitee has spent the last 20 years living in the house, raising their family – if it is in the sole name of their partner and the relationship breaks down – they could end up homeless with nothing to show for it.

Even where the house is owned jointly, couples may find at the end of the relationship that their ‘share’ is not what they expected it to be.”

Katherine Livesey, a Senior Associate based in Chester, concurred with Sandy’s view and added “Apart from the house, the cohabitees have no other available claims against other assets regardless of the length of the relationship. This can severely disadvantage individuals, particularly with any disparity in pension rights. Maintenance claims are also off the table for cohabitees”

“It’s one of the reasons why the Family Team here at Aaron and Partners will be helping to raise awareness around the ‘common law marriage’ myth this week, but also in the hope that the Government will look at better ways to protect couples who decide not to marry. The risks of serious injustice are plain to see without proper reform”, she concludes.

Run by Resolution, the national governing body for family lawyers, National Cohabitation Awareness Week runs from November 27 – December 1.

If you would like to receive more advice on the legal issues surrounding cohabitation, please do not hesitate to contact Sandy Edwards (Shrewsbury office) or Katherine Livesey (Chester office) in our Family Law team using their details below.

Sandy Edwards – Shrewsbury Office

Family Law Senior Associate
Email: [email protected]
Tel: 01743 435689

Katherine Livesey – Chester Office

Family Law Senior Associate
Email: [email protected]
Tel: 01244 405422

You might also be interested in...

Solicitor Ordered to Pay £54,000 in Costs on Appeal from Fine of £2,000

19th January, 2018

Professional misconduct was recently at issue in the case of Donna Eloise Cannon v Solicitors Regulation Authority Case No: 11547-2016 Ms Cannon was ordered to pay the Solicitors Regulation Authority’s (“SRA”) costs of £54,000 when she decided to appeal a decision to impose a Rebuke, fine of £2,000 and costs of £1,350. Ms Cannon, who was at the... Read More »

Peninsula’s Problems: Round Two – Constructive Unfair Dismissal

12th January, 2018

HR Consultancies are widely used by businesses as they are often (wrongly) perceived to offer a cost saving in comparison to solicitors and barristers. A well known HR Consultancy, Peninsula, last year faced claims of constructive unfair dismissal, age discrimination, disability discrimination, non-payment of holiday pay and non-payment of commission. The judgement in the case of Tarbuck v Peninsula... Read More »

Solicitors and Former Clients’ Access to Files

4th January, 2018

If you fear a claim or complaint against your firm what rights do you have to limit access to a former client and their new advisers? The recent case of Green & Others v SGI Legal LLP Case No: CL1706093, ruled on a situation that many solicitors may have found themselves; a client has requested a file and... Read More »

Contact Us