Who Is Considered a Cohabitee in Inheritance Act Claims?
Posted on in Dispute Resolution
Our approach to marriage has changed over the years. Once it was considered a mandatory celebration between couples looking to settle down, but it is now seen more as an optional ceremony. Due to this societal change in stance, there are now many more couples who are living together without getting legally married.
Despite the popularity of opting for a cohabitee arrangement, there remain significant legal differences between the rights of cohabitees and married couples – namely, what happens to the deceased’s estate. It is becoming increasingly common to see cases where someone’s partner dies and, although they were not married but they were living together, they are unsure where they stand legally.
The Inheritance Act 1975
If you do not believe that a deceased estate has left sufficient funds for you, then you may be entitled to bring a claim under the Inheritance Act 1975 (the Act). This Act allows a person to make a claim that they should be allowed funds, or additional funds, from the estate.
However, such a claim is not open for everyone to bring, and in order to bring a claim under this Act, you need to have a sufficient connection to the deceased. This can be people legally connected to the deceased by blood and marriage, such as the deceased’s spouse and children, but it can also include people who are not legally connected to the deceased, such as cohabitees.
It may not surprise you that, given the broad range of meaning that can be inferred from a cohabitee, there have been many debates as to who is considered a “cohabitee” in such claims. For example, do the two “cohabitees” need to be living in the same house, 7 days a week? What if they were more akin to roommates and had separate finances and expenses? Courts have tried to clarify what is meant by the term “cohabitee”.
Adding clarity to “Cohabitee”
The Act sets out that in order for a claimant to be considered a cohabitee, the deceased and claimant must be living a life together as if they were a married couple or in a civil partnership. The Courts will therefore pay particular attention to the conduct of the parties and the relationship between them.
One common issue is whether the parties need to be living in the same house to be treated as a cohabitant. For example, what if one party was living with the deceased for certain periods of time while also living within a separate property outside of these periods of time? This is common in cases where both parties enjoyed their own personal space, or one party needs to travel away for work for substantial periods.
The Courts have dealt with this by distinguishing between living in the same “household” and living in the same “house”. A household allows parties’ social, physical, and financial relationships to be considered rather than just focusing on the house itself. The Courts have dealt with such circumstances by setting out that the claimant and the deceased need to be living in the same “household” instead of the same “house”. The Court has explained that there is a distinction between these two labels. A household takes into account the parties' social, physical, and financial relationship, not just the “house” itself. Therefore, a couple could be living in the same household, even if they were not living in the same property.
One of the primary ways to conclude whether a couple is within the same household is to look at the economy of both parties. Do they share the same assets, income, and/or outgoings, or do they have two separate financial lives that are not dependent on each other? In the case of Swetenham v Walkley 2014, the Court found that while one party had spent limited time in a second home, this time was ignored by the Court, which found that the couple had essentially been living as if they lived together under one roof. The Court came to this conclusion because it found that the couple were still living as husband and wife. This was illustrated by their day-to-day arrangements, including cooking together, doing their laundry together, and spending much of their time together over a period of 30 years.
Overall, the Courts are willing to expand the literal definition of a cohabitee in circumstances where parties have lived as if they were husband and wife. Therefore, while it will be an advantage to have the parties physically living together for them to be considered cohabitees, it is not the sole deciding factor as to whether a couple can be considered cohabitees under the Act.
How can Tozers help?
At Tozers, we have a wealth of experience assisting clients with these types of contentious probate matters. If you need some assistance, please do not hesitate to contact our specialist dispute resolution team today.