The government’s long-awaited consultation on cohabitation reform has received a mixed reaction from professionals.
To make sense of the proposals the Today’s Family Lawyer Podcast welcomes partner and head of family at William Sturges, Graeme Fraser. Fraser is renowned for his campaigning and expertise in cohabitation reform and, alongside his many media appearances, is also chair of Resolution’s Cohabitation Committee.
So who better to ask about the far-reaching consultation and wider family law modernisation?
The consultation is both ambitious and surprisingly comprehensive says Fraser, taking into account the previous work done on financial remedies, nuptial agreements, wedding reform and the Law Commission’s proposals on will writing reform. This joined up approach is to be applauded, says Fraser, arguing that family law has become increasingly fragmented and difficult for non-lawyers to understand. He suggests the consultation reflects a deliberate attempt to modernise legislation and create a framework that is clearer, more accessible, and better aligned with contemporary family life.
There is a clear disconnect between modern relationships and outdated legal structures; cohabitation law has simply failed to keep pace with social change, despite a growing proportion of couples choosing not to marry. One simple example being the ‘common law marriage’ myth which leaves vulnerable people, particularly women and parents, without adequate legal protection when relationships break down.
On financial remedies, the consultation seeks to codify decades of case law into legislation that is easier to understand. The proposals focus largely on the principles of ‘needs’ and ‘sharing’, while attempting to define key concepts more clearly than current legislation allows. Fraser notes one of the consultation’s most significant and unexpected features is its proposal that cohabitation claims should be based primarily on needs rather than compensation, representing a departure from earlier recommendations made by the Law Commission.
The conversation explores eligibility under the proposed cohabitation framework, where Fraser emphasises the qualification period must not be set so high that the legislation becomes inaccessible to those who need it most, and proposals to allow couples to opt out of the new cohabitation regime. Cohabitation differs fundamentally from marriage because individuals have not entered into a formal legal contract, but the proposals do leave room for potential abuse or coercion. Robust safeguards, legal advice, improved screening processes and wider awareness of domestic abuse issues will be essential to ensure vulnerable individuals are adequately protected. Greater certainty around nuptial agreements is welcome, adds Fraser.
The speed of political change is evident in the fact the consultation was launched by Sir Keir Starmer’s government, and concluded under Andy Burnham; is there a risk then it could all be for nought?
Fraser remains cautiously optimistic. He points to the significant work already undertaken by the Ministry of Justice, extensive stakeholder engagement, and the strong policy rationale underpinning the proposals. While acknowledging that parliamentary time remains a challenge, he argues that modernising family law is both necessary and beneficial, with the potential to create fairer outcomes, reduce pressure on courts, and provide greater certainty for millions of people navigating relationships and family life.
The Today’s Family Lawyer podcast is available on your preferred podcast provider and at www.todaysfamilylawyer.co.uk.
Subscribe to Today’s Family Lawyer to receive our FREE weekly newsletter, out every Thursday and listen in to the podcast to hear all the latest news and views from across the family law sector. Thank you to our Podcast Sponsors LEAP.
