Legality
Posted by Batman on 12-21-2007 in Marriage vs. CohabitationInteresting implications--I like the idea of bringing in a legal perspective--I'm coming to see cohabitation as too idealistic of a situation in a world riddled with realistic problems such as those you've mentioned---"proof of ownership, maintenance of costs, division of expenses." I feel that I might have to settle for a marriage because of these logistics. It seems that cohabitation would be the easy way to not deal with the details, but I think it could also be the most difficult.
Do you think the legal consequences would be comparatively more in the dissolving of cohabitation or a marriage situation? Because I'm sure that marriage would also have its issues.
In response to: Re: The Choice
There has yet to be any set rules pertaining to cohabitation- I remember reading from the Law Society a few years ago that although it has been attempted, since 2002, there has been very nominal significance in creating a set structure-perhaps that is why cohabitation may seem appealing, because there are no true restrictions, as opposed to "being wed." Simultaneously, in a legal outlook, I only see cohabitation as adverse. Taking into account the difficulties that would exist in joint loans and pensions..even considering what would happen post-breakup, it just seems that this yield more complications than anything else. In the case of a break-up, extrication of property; there would be no proof of ownership, maintenance of costs, division of expenses..etc. I feel like such agreements exist because of a couples inability to figure it out on their own. Of course, if you consider what is bringing the two individuals together, regardless of the title "marriage" or "cohabitation," I guess what should only matter is the fact that the two are in love..