Unmarried property rights dispute

A woman is challenging a decision that has been passed down from the Court of Appeal which gave her partner an equal amount in the house that they share, even though they were not married.

Mr Kernott and Miss Jones started their relationship in 1980. Miss Jones, 5 years later, then put down capital for a bungalow in Essex. They never married but had two children together. They shared the mortgage for 8 years until the couple separated and Mr Kernott moved out and started to rent another property.

Miss Jones decided to stay in the property for the next 13 years. She made all appropriate payments for the house, which included the mortgage, the upkeep of the property and endowment policy premiums. During the time she did not receive any child support maintenance or money from the CSA for either of their two children.

In 2006 Mr Kernott then demanded his share in the property. An original court ruling ruled that Miss Jones was entitled to 90% of the property, leaving the remaining 10% to Mr Kernott. However; the Court of Appeal said that, despite the unequal contributions that both parties have made on the bungalow, he was still entitled to 50% because the property was jointly held.

If the couple had still been married then the courts would have probably ruled in favour of Miss Jones because of the payments that she made for the house. However because they were never married the courts had to follow strict procedure and joint ownership meant the property had to be split 50/50.

The Supreme Court will wait to hear arguments from both lawyers before making a final decision, but this looks like a rare instance where the court has not sided with the woman, yet once again they’ve got it wrong.