Co-habitation...

Will it affect financial settlement if there is no claim for spousal maintenance ( csa have sorted child maintenance), both partners earn enough ( and same) to meet their housing needs? Or will new partner's income be taken into account when splitting assets? ( eg house, ISAs and endowments)

Hi Tate,

I am not sure I understand your query, but the purpose of spousal maintenance is to try and ensure that not only do the parties not have to endure undue financial hardship as a result of the divorce, but that they also can achieve a standard of living comparable to what they had before.

If you can both manage on respective incomes after the capital split then there ought not to be any spousal maintenance. If neither of you apply for spousal maintenance then I believe it cannot be awarded.

YA

Thank you Ya,

My query is really the effect on the split between the two parties on matrimonial assets. Would the cohabiting partner get less because he/she is benefitting from the income and assets of a new partner?

I'm asking because the E1 asks for new partner's income and assets, therefore are they taken into account when the court decides what the split will be?

Young again wrote:

I am not sure I understand your query, but the purpose of spousal maintenance is to try and ensure that not only do the parties not have to endure undue financial hardship as a result of the divorce, but that they also can achieve a standard of living comparable to what they had before.

This is the bit that I don't really understand.

On the basis that the former partner has a good home, a reasonable car, can put good food on the table etc, am I still liable to keep forking out for her to live the life of Riley when she is only prepared to work part time.

Has she not got an obligation that if she wants to maintain the lifestyle that I afforded her through my hard work, she needs to go out and pay for it herself from now on.

I would not expect to be able to sponge off somebody else for the rest of my life or am I missing something..??

Hi Tate.

As I understand it, the main effect of your cohabitation is that a court is likely to take the view that your housing needs are already met. (Assuming , you are the one cohabiting) This could have a significant bearing on the equity split, particularly if there are any dependent children involved.

Goldie, that is the $64,000 question! I would say she certainly has a moral obligation to fund her desired lifestyle. Not sure yet about her legal obligation. I am hoping to be able to answer this one in the not too distant future L O L.

jim

Hi Tate,

Cohabitation of an xtb is a relevant factor in ancillary relief as it influences the financial needs of that spouse. Please note that an xtb may be supporting their cohabiting partner.

The capital asset split is I think less influenced by post separation cohabitation of the wife and mother with the children. The split is an apportionment of marital assets that the wife helped build up during the marriage and so post-marital relationships should have no bearing on that.

What cohabitation may very well influence is the amount and period of any spousal maintenance. In K v K (periodical Payments: Cohabitation) 2005 Judge Coleridge shortened the period of spousal maintenance from what had been agreed in a Consent Order.

YA

Hi Goldie,

The business about 'standard of living' only really enters into the equation where there is enough money to split to take care of food and shelter and it applies to both to both parties, albeit the main income earner can get heavily stung in a capital split in the Ancillary Relief Order on the basis that he/she can make it up within a few years.

Your xtb has an argument that you managed to work hard and get in the position to earn your income because she supported you, taking care of other stuff that would have otherwise held you back.

Your argument would not unreasonably be that now there are two households to support from the same total income, cut-backs are inevitable.

I do not know what you mean exactly by the life of Riley, but I would think the Courts would listen to an ordered and calculation supported argument about what each party's reasonable financial needs are.

YA