Cohabitation (Essay) - Grade: 15/25 PDF

Preview

Summary

Essay on Cohabitation...

Description

15/2 6.

12/3/2020

Should cohabitants be treated like married couples?

Add Cohabitation Rights Bill 2019-2021 and fix answer!!!! Cohabitation in the United Kingdom is can be defined as a form of partnership when between an unmarried couple who are currently living together in a long-term relationship which resembles a marriage. Moreover, It is worth noting that while cohabitation can refer to any number of people who are living together , but a cohabitating couple can will be defined as a couple who are not married but are living together under one roof. However, it is worth noting that Ccohabitation is currently the fastest growing family type in the United Kingdom with 19.2 million families in 2019, based on the Office for National Statistics. It can be submitted that if an individual is a cohabitant, he or she will not have the same rights as a married individual and contrary to popular belief/opinion, there is no such thing as a ‘common law marriage’. The statement above poses a question as to whether cohabitants should be given equal rights and benefits so as to be treated like married couples.

A ‘common law marriage’ is when two 2 people living together in a relationship, similar to one of a marriage stable sexual relationship.

Many cohabitating couples consider

themselves in a “common law marriage”. This is a risky assumption/presumption because many cohabitees mistakenly/wrongly believe that if their relationship were to break down or if their partner died, they would be given the same/similar legal/lawful protection as/like married couples. But in reality/in actual fact, in the United Kingdom, there is no such thing as a common law marriage/common law marriage does not exists. This means that/thus, many cohabitants could risk financial ruin and/or becoming homeless if their partner died, or if the relationship ended abruptly. In comparison to cohabitation, a marriage is ideally a different form of partnership although it may be similar in certain aspects.

1

A marriage was defined in the case of Hyde v Hyde as ‘the voluntary union for life of one man and one woman to the exclusion of all other.’ /the However, it is worth noting that this definition is deemed to be outdated. In a simpler term, a marriage is two individuals forming a union, in order to legalise their relationship in the eyes of the law. [please add on the 2013 Same Sex Marriages Act] Additionally, the reason why people choose to get married to enjoy tax benefits, have a sense of security in their relationship and to take their relationship to the next level. However, despite the entitlement mentioned, there are some individuals who choose not to get married and rather cohabitate instead.

Cohabitation is defined in the case of Kimber v Kimber and a few factors were listed down, which needs to be taken into consideration in deciding whether the couples in question are cohabitants are not. Moreover, the Family Law Act 1996, also gave a definition for cohabitation as ‘two persons who although not married, are living together as husband and wife (if of the same sex) in an equivalent relationship.’ /a type of relationship where two individuals are living together like a married couple but is actually not married. However, this definition is only limited to instances of domestic violence. It is worth noting that Parliament did not give a proper definition for cohabitation.

Furthermore, recently in the United Kingdom, individuals are choosing to cohabitate rather than getting married. Among the reasons is This is because a cohabitating relationship is easier to dissolve than a marriage. It can be submitted that there is no legal procedure for cohabitants to end their relationship unlike married couples. Additionally, many old people cohabitate for companionship and see no need in getting married. There are also some individuals who do not believe in marriages and this may be due to experiencing a failed relationship or having parents that are divorced. Moreover, some individuals cohabitate in fear of the stigma of divorce. These people find it embarrassing to be labelled as a divorcee. Lastly, when individuals cohabitate, they will be free from any financial obligations to one another when the relationship break down.

2

As much as cohabitation and marriage are akin to one another, the absence of a legal documentation and the required formalities demands that cohabitating couples ought to be treated differently from married couples. It can be submitted that a marriage and cohabitation is different when a child comes into the picture. When a married father has a child, he is given an automatic legal presumption of paternity but the same does not apply to a child from a cohabitating father, the cohabitating father is required to apply for the right to paternity. This is due to the fact that the law has a perception that cohabitating couples are not as committed in their relationship like a married couple. This is because of the ease of getting in and out of a relationship that exists in a cohabitation relationship, hence, this is why parental responsibility is not given automatically to cohabitants.

Additionally, there are many to which the law would treat cohabitants differently from married couples. Among them is that when a married couple gets a divorce, the more financially stable spouse may have the obligation to provide financial support for the other spouse. This does not apply to cohabitating couples; hence this is deemed to be unfair because cohabitants should be treated like married couples. Cohabitants also do not get enjoy any tax reliefs and exemption like married couples. However, this is deemed to be a fair deal because in order to get married, there are so many legal formalities that needs to be satisfied, hence, it is only fair that married couples get to enjoy this.

It is worth noting that cohabitants do not have any legal formalities to satisfy before entering into a cohabitating relationship. Furthermore, most married couples will inherit their deceased spouse’s property but cohabitants do not enjoy the same benefit. Therefore, it can be submitted that this is unfair to cohabitants that have been cohabitating for so many years because there is a possibility that they may end up with nothing when their cohabitating partner pass way, without having a will.

Moreover, the protection offered for domestic violence varied based on the individual’s relationship status. The law seems to grant protection to married domestic victims in a

3

manner easily in comparison to cohabiting victims. A married victim gets protection from the courts easily compared to a cohabitating victim. This is in relation to the application of significant harm test where for a married victim of domestic abuse which operates as a presumption gets immediate protection unlike for a cohabitating victim whereby it works as a further consideration. This due to the fact that there is no legal documentation proving that the victim and the abuser are cohabitants. This is deemed to be unfair because the courts are supposed to offer protection to victims of domestic abuse, regardless of their relationship status, hence, the law should offer some rights to cohabitants which married couples get to enjoy.

Despite all the incompetence of the law to give some rights to cohabitants, the Cohabitation Rights Bill 2017 was introduced as a result of the Law Commission’s Report and proposals in 2007. The purpose of this Bill is to provide protection to financially disadvantaged cohabitants and to make provision for them on the death of their partner. This Bill also broadly defined cohabitants as those who have lived together as a couple for 3 years or more, or couples who have a child together. However, it is worth noting that this Bill can no longer come into effect, due to the suspension of the British Parliament in 2019. Therefore, in order for this Bill to come into effect, the new Parliament will need to reintroduce it. This Bill aims to provide some

Arguments for the Bill is that with the increasing number of cohabitating couples, it is only fair that the law accommodates to the needs of the society which is better right for cohabitants. Additionally, supporters of the Bill argue that given the proportion of the people affected is increasing, it is only appropriate that the government intervenes to protect those who are most vulnerable which in most cases are women who gave up their careers to raise children.

However, there are some that may argue that if cohabitants want to enjoy the same benefits enjoyed by married couples, then cohabitants should just get married. Some individuals are

4

of the opinion that cohabiting couples have specifically chosen not to marry and therefore they should not have marriage-like rights. It can be submitted/Thus, that an individual should not be forced to get married and that the law should protect individuals fairly and without any discrimination.

Therefore, by looking at this as a whole, it is worth noting that cohabitants should not be given all the rights enjoyed by married couples. This is because, as discussed above, a married couple went through the necessary formalities to get married and it is not easy to for the parties to dissolve their marriage, unlike cohabitants, which as stated above, is easy to dissolve. However, it would be highly unfair to completely give no rights to cohabitants. Therefore, the law should provide them with some rights in areas where it will be deemed to be unfair if they do not have certain rights for example in areas under the financial provision upon breakdown of relationship and protection order for domestic abuse victims.

In Ontario, Canada, two people are considered common law married, i.e. cohabitants, if they have been continuously living together in a conjugal relationship for at least 3 years. However, if they have a child together, then they only need to have been living together for 1 year. The laws in Canada governing common law relationship differ from province to province.

As a conclusion, the laws on cohabitation in the United Kingdom needs to be reformed, in order to better accommodate the needs of the society whom prefers cohabitation over marriage. The Cohabitation Rights Bill 2017 should be reintroduced by the new British Parliament by making a more comprehensive Bill that takes all the recommendation so that it can offer better protection to cohabitations.

5...