Cohabitants: a changing landscape

Policy makers in the rest of the UK continue to wrestle with how best to protect the rights of cohabitants.

President of the Family Division in England & Wales Sir James Munby bemoaned the fate of unmarried women who are “thrown on the scrapheap” after long cohabiting relationships.

Here, the post-Gow v Grant landscape continues to evolve, with two recent noteworthy decisions. In Garrad v Inglis 2014 GWD 1-17, a five day preliminary proof was heard to determine the date of cessation of cohabitation and consequently whether the action was time barred.

Sheriff Morrison’s list of the factors to be considered in determining when the parties ceased to cohabit as husband and wife can be expected to be the reference point for future cases, in much the same way as his decision in Treasure v McGrath still operates in parental responsibilities and rights actions.

Also worth mentioning is the sheriff’s determination that the date of application was the date of lodging rather than the date of service on the defender.

Sheriff Principal Scott’s decision in Cameron v Lukes, Glasgow Sheriff Court, 2 December 2013 (2014 GWD 7-144) stressed that even allowing for a “rough and ready”, “broad brush” approach to quantifying claims, averments and material were still required to make an economic disadvantage claim.

A more detailed commentary on these cases appears in the most recent edition of the Family Law Association Bulletin.