fbpx

Cohabitants Entitled to Bereavement Damages

20th February 2018 By Arman Khosravi

The legal implications of cohabitation are often poorly understood by those who choose to live together outside of marriage or civil partnership, and the lack of protection for cohabitants often comes as an unpleasant surprise to many, especially when a relationship ends or one of the partners dies.

Given that there are more than three million cohabiting couples in the UK, this lack of awareness produces dozens of court cases annually as long-term cohabitants find they must fight to try to realise their expectations of their legal rights.

However, a recent decision of the Court of Appeal will give some comfort to long-term cohabitants as regards entitlement to bereavement damages. These have always been able to be claimed by spouses and civil partners, but not ‘common law’ spouses.

The case revolved around the death of a man who had lived with his partner for 16 years. He died as a result of admitted negligence and a successful claim for compensation was made against the NHS trust responsible. The claim was possible because the couple had lived together for more than two years. His partner was not entitled to bereavement damages, however, because they were not married. The Fatal Accidents Act 1976 provides for bereavement damages to be paid to spouses, civil partners and dependants, but excludes in effect cohabitants who are not dependent on their partner.

The woman’s claim was made against the Secretary of State for Justice on the ground that the exclusion was discriminatory and a violation of her human rights under the European Convention on Human Rights.

The Court of Appeal agreed. Cohabitation is a normal form of family life and, indeed, is the fastest growing family type in the UK, according to the Office for National Statistics.

Source: Concious

Latest News

Retired Businessman's Final Will Ruled Invalid

2nd May, 2024 By

Having your will drawn up professionally by a qualified solicitor is always a sensible precaution, especially in later life. In a recent case, the High Court ruled that a retired businessman lacked testamentary capacity when he made a will less than three and a half years before he died at the age of 87. The man and his first wife were married for nearly 40 years and had four children. After her death he married again. In October 2015 he made a new will, revoking in most respects a will...

Company Owner's Negligible Value Claim Unsuccessful

29th April, 2024 By

When an asset falls in value to the point that it is almost worthless, it may be possible to make a negligible value claim under Section 24 of the Taxation of Chargeable Gains Act 1992. The asset will then be treated as if it had been sold and immediately acquired again, so that the loss can be set off against other income. For a claim to succeed, however, the asset must have become of negligible value during the time the claimant owned it. On 30 September 2017, a woman who...

Court Sanctions Leg Amputation for Man Lacking Mental Capacity

24th April, 2024 By

The courts are often called upon to sanction treatment for patients whose ability to make decisions for themselves is impaired. In a recent case on point, the Court of Protection had to decide whether it was in the best interests of a man with mental health issues to have his right leg amputated above the knee. The man, aged 60, was taken to hospital by his niece. He was found to have an ulcerated leg. He had a history of paranoid schizophrenia, and believed that the sores on his leg...

High Court Grants Parental Order Despite Previous Adoption

18th April, 2024 By

In law, adopted children are regarded as having been born to their adoptive parents. The Family Division of the High Court recently considered whether that fact precluded a parental order being granted under the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 2008 (HFEA) in respect of a child born via surrogacy. A couple who lived in the USA had entered into a surrogacy arrangement with another woman. An adoption order naming the couple as the child's parents had been made by a US court and was automatically recognised under UK law. However,...