A Fairer End to Relationships: The Biggest Family Law Reforms in Decades?

The Government has launched a major consultation proposing some of the most significant changes to family law in England and Wales for over 50 years. If implemented, the reforms would reshape how finances are dealt with on divorce, introduce new rights for many cohabiting couples, and strengthen inheritance protections for unmarried partners.

For family lawyers and separating couples alike, these proposals could mark a fundamental shift in the legal landscape.

Why Reform Is Being Considered

Family life has changed dramatically over the last few decades, but the law has not always kept pace.

Today, more than 3.5 million couples in England and Wales live together without being married or in a civil partnership—more than double the number three decades ago. Yet many people remain unaware that cohabiting couples do not enjoy the same legal protections as married couples when relationships break down. The Government believes this gap can leave many families financially vulnerable, particularly women, children and victims of domestic or economic abuse.

At the same time, the law governing financial claims on divorce is largely based on legislation dating back to 1973, with many key principles having developed through case law rather than clear statutory rules.

The consultation therefore seeks to create a system that is clearer, fairer and easier for families to understand.

Current Law on Divorce

The law governing financial settlements on divorce in England and Wales is largely based on the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973. While the legislation provides a framework, much of the law has been developed through decades of court decisions. This means judges have a wide discretion when deciding how assets, income, pensions and property should be divided between separating spouses.

The court’s first consideration is the welfare of any children under the age of 18. It must then consider a range of factors including the parties’ income, earning capacity, financial needs, standard of living during the marriage, ages, health, contributions and conduct in exceptional cases.

While this flexibility allows the court to achieve fairness in individual cases, it can also create uncertainty. Many divorcing couples find it difficult to predict what a court might decide, which can increase legal costs and make settlement negotiations more challenging.

Proposals for Reform on Divorce

The Government’s consultation proposes placing key principles developed by the courts into legislation, creating a clearer and more predictable framework for financial settlements.

The law would distinguish more clearly between “matrimonial property”, acquired during the marriage, and “non-matrimonial property”, such as assets owned before the marriage or received by inheritance or gift.

One of the central proposals is that matrimonial assets should generally be shared equally between spouses, and if there are insufficient resources to share then a departure may be required to meet the parties needs, which would be assessed in a three stage test:

Stage 1: Children’s needs come first

Reflecting current law, the court should consider the welfare of a child of the family and

consider their needs first.

Stage 2: Consider divorcing couples’ capital and income needs, including their

housing and pension needs

After considering the needs of any child of the family, the parties housing, income and pension needs, as far as resources allow. These needs may be linked to a child’s needs.

Stage 3: Consider discretionary needs

After completing Stage 2, where resources permit, the court would consider discretionary

needs. We consider these needs to be lifestyle ‘luxuries’. For example, luxury items could

include expensive cars or designer items including clothing or accessories. Stage 2 and 3 would need to be clearly distinguished.

The aim is to create greater certainty for separating couples, reduce disputes and encourage earlier settlement. The government’s view is that the needs of the parties should be met in such a way as to enable transition to independence for both parties, as far as resources allow.

Current Law on Nuptial Agreements

Pre-nuptial and post-nuptial agreements have become increasingly common, particularly where one or both parties bring significant assets into a marriage. However, unlike in some other countries, such agreements are not automatically binding in England and Wales.

Since the Supreme Court decision in Radmacher v Granatino, the courts will generally uphold a nuptial agreement where both parties entered into it freely, understood its implications and the outcome is fair. However, the court retains the ultimate power to depart from the agreement if necessary, particularly where it would leave one party or any children in financial hardship.

As a result, while nuptial agreements carry significant weight, they cannot currently guarantee a particular outcome.

Proposals for Qualifying Nuptial Agreements

The consultation proposes the introduction of legally binding “Qualifying Nuptial Agreements”. These agreements would allow couples greater autonomy to decide how their assets should be dealt with if their relationship ends.

To qualify, agreements would need to satisfy a number of safeguards designed to ensure fairness and informed decision-making. The safeguards proposed are as follows:-

• Contract Validity: the agreement must be a valid contract without, for example,

undue influence or misrepresentation.

• Execution as Deed: the agreement must have been made by deed and must

contain a statement signed by both parties that they understand the agreement is a

qualifying nuptial agreement that will partially remove the court’s discretion to make

financial orders.

• 28-Day Period: the agreement must not have been made within the 28 days

immediately before the wedding or the celebration of civil partnership.

• Material Financial Disclosure: each party to the agreement must have received, at

the time of making of it, disclosure of material information about the other party’s

financial situation.

• Independent Legal Advice: independent legal advice for each party signing the

nuptial agreement, to ensure each understands the legal effect and consequences of

the agreement.

• It should not be possible for a party to waive their rights to disclosure and legal advice.
• Any variation of an agreement must meet the requirements listed above.

While parties would be able to contract out of the sharing principle, they would not be able to contract out of meeting each other’s basic financial needs or the needs of any children.

If implemented, these reforms could provide greater certainty for couples, reduce litigation and align England and Wales more closely with jurisdictions where nuptial agreements are already fully enforceable.

Current Law on Cohabitation

A common misconception is that couples who live together acquire the status of “common law husband” or “common law wife”. In reality, no such legal status exists.

Unlike married couples, cohabitants cannot make financial claims against one another simply because their relationship has ended. Property disputes are usually determined by complex trust and property law principles, often leading to uncertainty and costly litigation. Many financially vulnerable partners can be left without adequate protection despite years of contribution to the relationship or family life.  Parents can make claims against another parent as the carer of a child but their rights are attached to those of the child and are therefore time limited.

Proposals for Reform

The Government is consulting on introducing a new legal framework for certain cohabiting couples.

The proposed scheme would apply to couples who can demonstrate that they are in a romantic, committed, long term interdependent relationship.  The proposals consider this to be couples who have lived together for at least three years, or who have a child together, unless they actively choose to opt out. The proposals stop short of giving cohabitants the same rights as married couples. Instead, they focus on addressing financial hardship and unmet needs arising from the relationship.  The proposals also suggest a two year time limit for making a financial claim on the other party following a relationship breakdown.

The needs of the party would be the court’s guiding principle and this will prioritise fair outcomes for children. Potential remedies could include lump sum payments, property adjustment orders and, in limited circumstances, financial support. The proposed framework seeks to balance personal autonomy with protection for vulnerable partners and children.

While the government proposes cohabitants have access to the same remedies as

divorcing couples, this does not mean there would be equivalent financial outcomes to

divorce. The court would not apply the sharing principle.

Cohabitants can also agree to opt out of these rights.  By making the scheme opt out rather than opt in, it would protect the financially weaker party.

The consultation also includes proposals to strengthen inheritance rights for cohabiting partners where one partner dies without leaving a valid will.

How the Law Currently Considers Domestic Abuse

Domestic abuse can already be relevant in financial remedy proceedings, but only in limited circumstances. Historically, the courts have been reluctant to take conduct into account unless it would be inequitable to disregard it.

As a result, even serious abusive behaviour may have little impact on the financial outcome of a divorce unless it has caused a clear and significant financial consequence. While courts increasingly recognise coercive and controlling behaviour, many victims feel that the current law does not adequately reflect the economic impact of abuse.

Economic abuse, which may include controlling access to money, preventing a partner from working, accumulating debt in their name or restricting financial independence, is now recognised within the Domestic Abuse Act 2021. However, its role within financial remedy proceedings remains limited.

Proposals for Domestic Abuse

The consultation seeks views on whether domestic abuse should play a greater role in financial settlements following divorce or dissolution.

In particular, the Government is considering how courts should take account of coercive control, economic abuse and other forms of domestic abuse when assessing financial outcomes. The consultation recognises that abuse can have long-lasting effects on a victim’s earning capacity, financial security and ability to rebuild their life after separation.

The proposals do not yet set out a definitive new framework but acknowledge growing concerns that the existing law may not adequately address the financial consequences of abuse. Any reforms could represent a significant shift in how the family courts approach fairness in financial remedy cases.

Need advice about divorce, financial settlements or cohabitation disputes?

At Rachel Jaysan Family Law, we help clients navigate complex family law issues with clear, practical and strategic advice. If you would like to discuss your circumstances, please get in touch for a confidential consultation.

Key statistics and proposals in this article are drawn from the Ministry of Justice consultation A Fairer End to Relationships: A Consultation on Reforming Financial Remedies on Divorce and Strengthening Protections for Cohabitants at the End of their Relationship (June 2026).