The Government published a Green Paper to deal with potential reforms to cohabitation law, entitled A Fairer End to Relationships, on 5 June 2026. This paper sets out proposals for reform across three areas of Family Law in England and Wales but most prominently, considers reforms to the law governing separation for cohabiting couples who are not married.
As a Green Paper, the document represents proposed reforms rather than any final or concluded change to the law. The proposals are subject further development and, ultimately, parliamentary approval.
At present, cohabiting couples do not benefit from the same legal protections as married couples or civil partners. In TOLATA, the starting point is that 'equity follows the law' meaning the legal owner is assumed to be the beneficial owner. The outcome can then turn on two main components: contributions made (primarily financial - to acquisition, mortgage payments, renovations) and intentions (can it be proven that there was an agreement to share interest and to what extent). There is no concept of a 'common law marriage' under the law despite this being a widespread misconception for people who have not taken legal advice. Instead, disputes between separating cohabitants are usually governed by principles of property and trust law, most commonly under the Trusts of Land and Appointment of Trustees Act 1996 (known as TOLATA). Financial provision for children may also arise separately under Schedule 1 to the Children Act 1989.
Many have argued that the current TOLATA framework can produce unfair outcomes, particularly where one party has contributed to the relationship in ways that aren’t tied to money, such as by caring for children or maintaining the household, or sacrificing earning capacity during the relationship.
The Government proposes to introduce a new framework which would apply automatically to qualifying cohabitants unless they choose to opt out. The scheme would be narrower than the Financial Remedy remit available on divorce or but would nevertheless allow the Court to make a range of financial Orders following separation that aren’t just tied to funding and contributions.
Under the proposals, the starting point would remain legal ownership, with the Court departing from that position only where necessary to meet defined needs. There is a consensus that whilst cohabitants may often need further legal protections, the government must consider striking a balance and avoiding interference with intended decisions made between a couple in private. Those needs are intended to be more limited than those considered on divorce under the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973, with a stronger emphasis on achieving a clean break (severing financial ties). The Government has also made clear that it does not intend to place cohabitants in a more favourable position than spouses or civil partners, or to mimic the exact benefits of marriage.
The scheme would apply to couples living together in what the Government describes as an ‘enduring family relationship’. In most cases, couples without children would need to have cohabited for at least three years before becoming eligible to make claims under the scheme. However, this minimum period would not apply where the parties have children together and there is likely to be a greater argument for meeting needs of dependants.
A number of concerns arise from the proposals. The proposed three year threshold is relatively low and may apply to couples who have not made any formal legal commitment to one another, and some of whom may not understand the ties they have formed if they did not choose to seek legal advice, especially as ‘opting out’ is the proposed resolution. Where children are involved, even comparatively short relationships could give rise to financial claims extending beyond child maintenance obligations.
Although the proposed opt out mechanism is intended to preserve the autonomy of couples who do not wish to become financially bound, the Government suggests that opting out would require compliance with certain formalities (such as providing written documentation, exchanging financial disclosure and seeking independent legal advice). In practice, these requirements may make opting out difficult or inaccessible for many couples, potentially resulting in parties becoming subject to the statutory framework by default rather than by informed choice.
The proposed reforms have been described as needs-based, but in practice they would allow for a broad and discretionary assessment by the Court. Needs may include housing, income, capital and pension provision, and the Court may also consider wider circumstances (such as illness, disability or caring responsibilities).
The exercise of judicial discretion may make outcomes more difficult to predict, particularly during the early years of any new legislation before case law develops. Cohabiting couples are urged to keep themselves updated as reforms are introduced.
Questions remain as to how the regime would interact with existing private arrangements, including declarations of trust or cohabitation agreements, which currently provide parties with a significant degree of certainty regarding ownership and intentions. It remains unclear whether such agreements would limit or exclude claims under the proposed scheme, and whether existing documents would need to be revisited.
The Government has indicated that the reforms would not replace TOLATA entirely. Different legal frameworks may continue to operate depending upon the nature of the dispute and the relief sought. Rather than simplifying this area of law, there is a possibility that the reforms could create parallel avenues to litigate, increasing the importance of seeking legal advice depending on your circumstances.
The proposals have not yet been implemented, and the current legal position remains unchanged. Until any legislation is enacted, disputes between cohabiting couples will continue to be determined under the existing legal framework.
In the meantime, cohabiting couples should take proactive steps to protect their positions. A carefully drafted cohabitation agreement remains one of the most effective ways of recording intentions regarding property ownership, contributions and the arrangements that should apply in the event of separation. Similarly, where property is purchased jointly, a declaration of trust can provide important certainty as to beneficial ownership. Taking legal advice at an early stage can help minimise the risk of future disputes.
Ella Vine
Ella Vine graduated in Law from Cardiff University and developed her commitment to Family Law through frontline Court volunteering, supporting individuals without legal representation.
She also led the University’s Innocence Project, overseeing investigations into potential wrongful convictions. Ella has since built practical experience as a paralegal and brings an organised approach to client support.
