The Charles Russell Speechlys Family Team Debate – Reform of the Law on Financial Claims on Separation and Divorce
min readThe laws governing financial claims when a couple separate are complex and date back over 50 years. Many say they are ripe for reform. The last Conservative government agreed, as they asked the Law Commission to produce a scoping report (due next month) addressing areas for reform. So do the new Labour government; they have indicated a desire to give unmarried cohabitants some financial claims akin to married couples.
Against this backdrop of growing appetite for change, the market leading Family Team at Charles Russell Speechlys hosted a debate on 19 November 2024 to discuss possible areas for reform. Many of the leading lights of the Family Law profession in London gathered to hear 10 leading barristers argue the case for or against various proposed reforms. This was followed by a discussion with former High Court judge Sir Philip Moor who shared his views on reform, after which the conversation spread to the assembled audience.
Throughout the night, the audience of industry experts voted on various propositions for reform and we can report that the results were as follows:
| Proposition | For – Pre-Debate | Against – Pre-Debate | For – Post-Debate | Against – Post-Debate |
The Court should be afforded less discretion when making financial orders
| 29% | 71% | 51% | 49% |
Nuptial agreements are a positive feature of the legal landscape and should, if anything, be given more weight by the Court
| 76% | 24% | 46% | 54% |
There should be a maximum period for the term of spousal periodical payment orders
| 27% | 73% | 17% | 83% |
Conduct/behaviour should be a factor to which the Court must have particular regard when deciding to make financial orders
| 47% | 53% | 26% | 74% |
The legal framework in respect of non-married couples is not fit for purpose and should be reformed
| 70% | 30% | 42% | 58% |
William Longrigg, Head of the Family Group, commented: “Family law is a highly discretionary area in which judges have demonstrated the capacity to move and develop the law to reflect a changing society. The voting results demonstrate that some areas of family law require more comprehensive legislative change and the intervention of parliament. The law relating to cohabiting couples is a prime example. Many family lawyers agree that those who cohabit, without marrying or entering into a civil partnership, have limited legal rights to financial protection, including for children. However, this is a complex issue as they are also concerned that the law should not inhibit those who wish to live together without the legal obligations of marriage from doing so. The voting reflected the complexity of imposing legal obligations similar to marriage on a cohabiting couple, after an arbitrary period of time, and on the impact on couples who have already lived together for a long period of time suddenly having marital rights and claims imposed upon them.”
