Kernott v Jones; unmarried couples and property ownership

Statistics recently published by the Office for National Statistics show that the number of marriages in 2009 was the lowest for over a century. More couples are, instead, choosing not to marry and to live together as cohabitees. Despite this, couples are currently unable to apply to the courts for full regulation of their financial affairs in the event that the relationship breaks down. For example, one party cannot claim maintenance to support themselves from the other. At present, an unmarried couple can only rely on property law to regulate the end of their relationship; however, many unmarried couples are not aware of the law and/or how it may affect them.

The law currently provides that unmarried couples who purchase a property in joint names, regardless of the contributions they each make, hold the property in equal shares, unless they have expressly stated and agreed otherwise.

One local couple, Patricia Jones and Leonard Kernott, have recently discovered the difficulties that can occur if the appropriate safeguards/arrangements are not put in place at the time of purchase. Patricia and Leonard are currently involved in a lengthy courtroom battle which has made it all the way to the Supreme Court.

Patricia met Leonard in 1980 when she was 26 years old. Between 1983 and 1984, Leonard moved in with Patricia and they had their first child, a daughter, together. In 1985, the couple purchased a property in Thundersley, Essex in joint names. Patricia contributed £6,000 and the balance was funded by way of a mortgage. The outgoings on the property, to include the mortgage and the bills were met by Patricia; Leonard contributed to the property by paying Patricia the sum of £100 each week and carrying out substantial building work.

In 1986, the couple had a second child, this time a son. After eight years of living together, during which time they did not marry, the couple separated and Leonard moved out. Patricia stayed in the property with the children and continued to meet all the financial outgoings without any contribution from Leonard.

In 2007, twelve years after Leonard moved out of the property, he made a claim for one half of the property, which had increased in value to £245,000 and had equity of £218,000.

The case has, so far, been heard by two courts; the first awarded Patricia a 90% interest in the property, with 10% to Leonard. On appeal, the judges disagreed and declared that the parties owned the property in equal shares. The case is now back before the courts again and the judges are being asked to determine whether or not an unmarried couple, who hold a property in equal shares at the date of their separation, can subsequently have their respective shares altered? The judgment is expected shortly. It is an area of law that continues to trouble the courts and we hope that the judges will give us some much needed guidance on this issue.