Re: Cohabitees Rights
- From: fjmd1a@xxxxxxxxx
- Date: 31 May 2006 12:12:17 -0700
Postman Pat wrote:
I agree completely. Marriage is trivial to do, and if the two aren't
married it's because at least one of them doesn't want to be. In any
other situation, a contract cannot be forced upon you if you make it
abundantly clear that you do not wish to enter into it.
Up to here I agree with you.
This sort of proposal surfaces every few years. The driving force is
the thousands of family law practitioners, who are either men-hating
pro-womens-rights females, or very civil-libertarian pro-womens-rights
males. On top of that, you will never get a turkey to vote for
But the above is nonsense. None of the female family lawyers I have met
or work with strike me as being "man-hating". In fact, the ones I work
most directly with have rather more conventional views of sexual
relationships. The male family lawyers I know are similarly unradical.
christmas and lawyers love anything that makes extra work for them.
The usual lobby front is the SFLA, a sham trade body which makes its
money by taking subscriptions from solicitors who can then stick the
"SFLA" sham logo on their stationery, and carry on doing work just as
they did before.
I'm not sure these proposals *will* mean more work for lawyers, just
different work. At the moment property lawyers (like me) end up getting
involved in the wrangles that arise when people cohabit and share
property (or not).
Just look at some of the phrases used:
"What legal protection do cohabitees currently have? "
Why is "legal protection" needed at all? These are ADULTS, for f***s
sake.
"On separation, a claim to a share of property can be exercised only
by using complicated trust law."
Which is exactly right - that is the law that covers the only
connection between them.
Its fair to say that the law in this area has been muddied rather
recently. As a result, it is much more difficult (in my view) to say
what people's rights are having cohabited. That uncertainty can't be
good and some codification might be useful (but of course, not on the
same lines as marriage which is insane).
"By contrast, married couples can go to court to "divide the spoils" "
Yes, right, "divide the spoils" is probably not what the writer
intended, but got it exactly right :) What a way to describe a
marriage, and explains why so many smart and capable people don't want
to marry.
" (the law was most recently re-shaped by the landmark Law Lords case
of 24 May). "
Hardly - they clarified a bit of the very high asset case situation.
"What legal rights do cohabitees want?"
A couple might want to have some rights with respect to each other
(such as being able to administer their deceased partner's estate)
without others (the equal division of property on splitting being one).
OTOH, it annoys me that I can't create a legal relationship with my
wife that reflects our view of the marriage relationship -- for example
I am unhappy with any situation where I have confidential information
which I am not to discuss with her.
Francis
.
- References:
- Cohabitees Rights
- From: The Todal
- Cohabitees Rights
- Prev by Date: Re: Stop n Search
- Next by Date: Re: He's watching me on his tele
- Previous by thread: Re: Cohabitees Rights
- Next by thread: Re: Cohabitees Rights
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
|
