Cohabitation Reform: Beyond the Headlines, What Could It Really Mean for Unmarried Couples?  

If you’re living with your partner but you’re not married, you may have seen news about proposed changes to the law and wondered whether things are finally about to change for couples in your situation. The short answer is possibly, eventually. But not yet. It’s better to understand your legal position now than wait until problems arise.  

Looking beyond the headlines  

Our colleague Laura Gusatu wrote about cohabitation reform when the government consultation was announced in June 2026, exploring the legal arguments for change and the genuine complexities the proposals raise. If you haven’t read that piece yet, it’s a good place to start. This one picks up from where that article left off.  

Cohabitation is now the fastest-growing family type in England and Wales, with more children than ever also being raised by unmarried parents. Family life has changed significantly over recent decades but the legal framework has changed very little. That’s one of the reasons cohabitation reform has become such an important area of discussion.  

The government’s consultation, formally titled “A fairer end to relationships”, is one of the biggest attempts to address those legal gaps. It opened on 5 June 2026 and runs until 14 August 2026. Any legislation that follows is unlikely to come into effect before 2028 . For now, however, the law remains exactly as it is.  

Couples living together today are the ones who will be most affected by these proposals: those that are buying homes, having children and making major financial decisions under a legal framework that still offers very limited protection.  

The common law marriage myth  

There is no such thing as “common law marriage” in England and Wales. There never has been. No matter how long you have lived with your partner, whether you have children together, share a mortgage or have built a life side by side, none of that creates automatic legal rights over each other’s property, savings, pension or inheritance.  

A number of cohabiting couples believe they have legal rights that they simply don’t have. It’s one of the most persistent myths in family law and one of the most costly because people can make major decisions based on it. They may buy homes without thinking about how ownership is structured. They could  give up careers to raise children without considering what that means for their financial position if the relationship should end. Perhaps they don’t make wills because they assume their partner will be provided for anyway.  

The government has acknowledged the scale of the problem. From September 2026, updated school guidance will require secondary schools to teach that common law marriage is a myth. While that will be helpful for the next generation, it doesn’t help the millions of adults who are making decisions right now based on a legal protection that doesn’t exist.  

If you’ve been thinking that your time together creates legal protection, it doesn’t, not currently, and that is unlikely to change quickly even with reform on the table.  

Where the law stands today  

If your relationship were to break down today, the legal starting point is this: each of you keeps what you own. There is no legal duty for one partner to support the other financially. There is no automatic sharing of property, savings or pensions. That might sound straightforward but in reality, most couples who have lived together for a while will have shared finances, possessions and responsibilities that aren’t always easy to separate.  

If you own a home together  

What happens on separation depends on how the property is held and what financial contributions each person has made. If you own a property as joint tenants, you both own it together; when one of you dies, the other will automatically become the sole owner. If you own it as tenants in common, you each own a defined share, which can pass separately under a will. Many couples don’t know which applies to them.  

Where there is a dispute about ownership (for example where one partner says they contributed more than the other, or where one partner’s name isn’t on the title deeds), complex trust law arguments are involved, which tend to be expensive and slow to resolve, even with specialist legal support.  

If one of you has been the primary earner  

A partner who has stepped away from work to care for children could be left with very little protection if the relationship ends. The same is true for a partner who has contributed financially to the relationship over the years but never built up assets in their own name. There is no equivalent of the matrimonial sharing principle that would recognise either contribution. The remedies available are limited and can be expensive to pursue.  

If your partner dies without a will  

You have no automatic right to inherit from your partner. Their estate (everything they own, including property, money and possessions) could pass to family members instead, regardless of how long you were together, how much your partner loved you, how many possessions you shared or how closely your finances were linked. This is one of the areas where reform could make a meaningful difference. Until it does, a well-drafted will remains the only reliable protection.  

If you have children together 

Schedule 1 of the Children Act 1989 does allow financial claims for children, including housing provision, but these focus on the child’s needs and do not provide long-term financial support for the parent caring for them. As our recent blog on Schedule 1 explains, these claims are more widely available than many people realise but they are not a substitute for the broader financial protection that married couples have on separation.  

The gap in the law is often felt most acutely by a partner who:   

• put their career on hold to raise children
• contributed to a home they don’t legally own    
• assumed that years together created rights that simply don’t exist  

Reform is, in part, a response to these realities.  

What the proposals could change and what they might not  

Laura’s article sets out the legal details of the proposals: the qualifying criteria, the opt-out system, the needs-based approach to financial provision and the proposed changes to inheritance rights for surviving partners. What it also highlights is that reform is unlikely to be straightforward in practice.  

Qualifying for the new framework, establishing when cohabitation began or ended, and determining what contributions were made are all questions that could generate new disputes, even under a reformed framework.  

There are already different views within the legal profession, not about whether change is neededbut about whether the proposals as currently drafted will achieve what they are set out to do. Those questions will determine how much protection any new law ultimately provides.  

Who will qualify?  

The proposed framework would apply to couples who have lived together for at least three yearsor who live together and share a child. But determining whether a relationship qualifies (what counts as a committed relationship, when cohabitation began and whether periods of separation interrupt the qualifying period) could itself become a source of dispute. Couples who don’t meet the criteria or fall just outside of that criteria will remain in the same position as they are now.  

Will the opt-out actually work?  

Couples who don’t want the framework to apply could opt out but only if they meet strict requirements, including independent legal advice and full financial disclosure. The reality is that many couples who choose not to marry are unlikely to seek legal advice to opt out of a legal framework they may not even realise applies to them.  

Relationships also evolve. Homes are bought, children are born and finances change. An opt-out agreed at the beginning of a relationship may no longer reflect the circumstances many years later.  

What about the detail of needs?  

Claims would be needs-based rather than based on equal sharing. That means courts would need to assess what each person requires (in terms of housing, income and financial support) rather than dividing assets equally. Defining those needs is not always straightforward. Basic housing costs may be relatively clear but beyond that, the picture becomes much more complex. This could be particularly pronounced where couples have enjoyed a high standard of living.  

Inheritance rights and the limits of reform  

The proposals would give qualifying cohabitants similar inheritance rights to spouses under the intestacy rules that apply when someone dies without a valid will. This would be an important change, but it also raises difficult questions, particularly where someone has children from a previous relationship or leaves behind only a modest estate with competing claims.  

None of this is a reason to dismiss the proposals. Most family lawyers agree that the current law no longer reflects modern family life, even if opinions differ on the best way to reform it. Any changes that address today’s legal uncertainty are likely to benefit many couples. At the same time, it’s sensible to be realistic about what reform is (and isn’t) likely to achieve.  

That’s why making decisions based on the law as it stands today remains the safest approach, whatever changes may come in the future.  

Why reform won’t happen overnight  

The consultation closes in August 2026. After that, the government will consider responses, prepare draft legislation and take the bill through Parliament. Even then, any changes are unlikely to come into force before 2028 at the earliest, and the process could take much longer.  

The Law Commission made its first recommendations on cohabitation reform in 2007. They were never implemented. In 2011, further recommendations followed on inheritance rights. Those were not implemented either. The current proposals appear to have stronger political momentum; cohabitation reform formed part of the Labour Party’s manifesto, and the government has committed to consulting on the issue, but that doesn’t guarantee how quickly change will happen.  

What is proposed now may also look quite different by the time legislation is eventually introduced. The details around how:   

• qualifying relationships are defined
• opt-outs work in practice
• needs are assessed  

will all be subject to consultation responses, amendment and parliamentary scrutiny.  

There is also a very genuine question about whether any new law would apply to existing relationships or only to those that begin after legislation comes into force – something that could affect millions of couples.  

If the history of cohabitation reform tells us anything, it’s that change rarely happens quickly. That’s why decisions about your home, your finances and your family are best made on the basis of the law that applies now, rather than a law that may or may not exist in a few years.    

What you can do now  

The law currently gives you very little automatic protection if anything goes wrong in your relationship. That won’t change overnight. The reassuring news is that there are practical steps you can take now that are valuable regardless of whether or not these suggested reforms eventually become law.  

Understand how your property is owned  

If you own a home together, do you know whether you hold it as joint tenants or tenants in common? Many couples don’t and it’s a detail that comes into effect in the circumstances of both separation and death.  

A Declaration of Trust records each person’s share clearly, sets out what happens if one of you wants to sell or if one of you dies. It removes the ambiguity that typically makes disputes like these so expensive. It is one of the most practical documents an unmarried couple can have, and yet one of the least talked about… until it’s too late.  

If you are thinking about buying a property together, this is exactly the right moment to take advice.  

How you structure ownership at the outset (who owns what share, what happens if one person contributes more to the mortgage or what happens if you separate) is far easier to agree on while your relationship is on solid ground than to argue about in a courtroom later.  

Consider a cohabitation agreement  

A Cohabitation Agreement records what you and your partner have agreed about property and finances and what happens if the relationship ends. Laura’s article also highlighted its value, and it’s worth repeating here because it is one of the most effective steps an unmarried couple can take. It’s far simpler (and far less expensive) to put one in place while your relationship is going well than to try to resolve these questions after difficulties have arisen.  

A well-drafted agreement can cover:

• property ownership
• financial contributions
• what happens to shared assets on separation
• how to provide for any children  

It doesn’t have to cover every eventuality, but it does create a clear record of what you both intended, which a court will take seriously.  

If reform does eventually introduce a formal opt-out mechanism, a Cohabitation Agreement is likely to become the primary way of using it. Its benefits don’t depend on future reform, however, it provides real clarity and certainty under the law as it stands today.      

Making a will  

Without a will, your partner has no automatic right to inherit from you – not now, and not in the immediate future. Your estate could pass to other family members instead, regardless of how long you and your partner were together or how much you shared.  

A will is one of the simplest and most effective ways unmarried couples can protect each other. It can also be updated as circumstances change.  

For many couples, this is the most pressing gap to address, because the consequences of dying without a will can fall on a surviving partner at exactly the moment when they are least able to deal with such a situation. If you have children together, a will also allows you to set out clearly how you would like them to be provided for, who you would wish to care for them and how your estate should be managed.  

These conversations aren’t always easy, but having them now can prevent much bigger problems later.  

Take advice before major financial decisions  

Buying a home together, stepping back from work to care for children, or making significant financial contributions to a property you don’t legally own all carry legal consequences that may not be obvious at the time.  

The same is true if you lend money to a partner, give up tenancy rights to move into a home they own, or pay for improvements to a property that is in someone else’s name.  

Getting advice before you act is almost always simpler than trying to untangle complications afterwards. A short conversation with a family law solicitor before making a financial commitment together can save a great deal of difficulty later and it doesn’t commit you to anything other than having a clearer picture of your legal position.  

Why planning ahead still matters  

Reform may well come, but it won’t arrive soon enough to help couples who are separating now or making important decisions about their home, family or finances. Couples are generally better off knowing where they stand before problems appear, not after.  

A Cohabitation Agreement, a clear understanding of how you own your home and a will can all make an enormous difference, providing certainty and peace of mind while you’re building a life together. Whatever happens with cohabitation reform, having a clear understanding of your legal position remains one of the best ways to protect yourselves and your family.  

The family law team at K J Smith Solicitors advises unmarried couples on cohabitation agreements, property ownership, Schedule 1 claims and estate planning. As part of our wider ecosystem of care, we can also introduce you to trusted financial advisers, estate planning specialists and other professionals who are able to provide additional support where it’s needed.  

If you’d like to understand where you stand or explore what a Cohabitation Agreement might look like, you can arrange a free 45-minute consultation with our family law team.