Cohabitation reform: The law needs to catch up with modern family structures - Siobhan Jeffels

As a family lawyer, working with separating couples is a routine part of my day-to-day role. Today, however, a growing part of my caseload is supporting separating unmarried couples who have had near identical experiences to their married counterparts. For example, building a home together, raising children and sharing their finances.

Despite these common experiences, the law offers little protection when relationships end, creating a challenging situation for couples and their legal advisers.

A change in the law is long overdue. Family life has evolved, and unmarried cohabitation is now one of the fastest-growing domestic structures. Figures released by the ONS said that the number of cohabiting families in the UK stands at 3.5 million – or roughly 17 per cent of all families. Despite this, the law hasn’t kept pace and leaves many couples who separate without rights and facing financial hardship. There is also widespread misunderstanding of the law itself, with many people still believing the myth of the “common law spouse” providing adequate protections.

Contrary to popular belief, there is no such thing as a common law spouse in England and Wales. Simply living together for a long time does not give an unmarried couple the same legal rights as married ones.

When a marriage ends, the court has discretionary powers to achieve fairness for the parties. However, when a cohabiting relationship ends, the strict legal framework is based on complex principles of property and trust law that are often difficult for even experienced lawyers to navigate, let alone separating couples. The result is often uncertainty, expense and, in many cases, outcomes that feel unjust.

There are encouraging signals from the government that potential change is on the horizon. On June 5, 2026, the Ministry of Justice launched its consultation: ‘A Fairer End To Relationships’, which proposes reform to the rights of separated or bereaved unmarried cohabitants. The consultation aims to explore achieving parity between married and unmarried couples in the eyes of the law. This includes considering whether the couple must have lived together for a minimum qualifying period. The proposal is three years, or no minimum time period if there is a child of the family.

It will also consider a time limit to bring a claim after the relationship has ended, with a proposed two-year limit from the date of separation. Other questions include what remedies and/or maintenance provisions should be made available; whether any financial outcome should be based on needs only, to preserve a clear distinction between married and unmarried couples. Additional questions include whether the law should be discretionary, as it is for married couples, or compensatory, based upon economic disadvantage, as in Scotland; and whether there should be an ‘opt out’ provision so that couples can decide if they want the same legal framework as married couples.

This is particularly important when children are involved. Their housing and financial security can be closely tied to their parents’ circumstances. However, the legal remedies available to an unmarried couple can be very different from those available following marriage. Reforms should ensure that children do not lose out financially because their parents chose a different family structure.

Since the Law Commission reported on the issue in 2007, previous governments have recognised these shortcomings but have shied away from changing the law. Whilst family lawyers agree the current law is inadequate and change is overdue, there is less consensus about proposed legislation. Legal reform is not straightforward and many couples consciously choose not to marry. Any new framework must balance respecting this choice without leaving vulnerable partners and children lacking a suitable financial remedy when a long relationship ends.

As family lawyers, we try to help people make informed decisions before problems arise. Written cohabitation agreements, declarations of trust and carefully drafted Wills remain essential tools, but they are not a substitute for a legal framework that reflects modern family life. A written cohabitation agreement can help couples set out how their finances and property should be dealt with, while a declaration of trust can clarify and record ownership of a property. A drafted Will is also important because cohabiting partners do not automatically inherit from one another in the same way as spouses.

The government’s consultation represents an opportunity to modernise the law and consider how it can better serve today’s families. It is important to remember, however, that the consultation does not mean the law has changed. The current legal position remains in place, so couples should not wait for possible reform before considering how best to protect themselves and their families.

Any future legislation will need to provide greater certainty for couples and families while ensuring that those who have deliberately chosen not to marry retain freedom over their financial arrangements. It must also be accessible enough that ordinary people can understand their rights without having to navigate a complicated legal system.

Siobhan Jeffels is a Family Law Partner at Ramsdens Solicitors.