The recent landmark case of Jones v Kernott holds huge importance for millions of cohabitating couples. Jones v Kernott was a property dispute between a couple who bought a house in joint names in 1985 but separated in 1993, with Ms Jones assuming sole responsibility for the mortgage and household expenses. Nearly twenty years later, Mr Kernott wanted half the value of the £245,000 property, even though he had made neither a mortgage payment nor any financial contribution after their separation.

The County Court ruled that Ms Jones should get 90 per cent of the value of the house and Mr Kernott 10 per cent, a decision upheld by the High Court. Mr Kernott took the case to the Court of Appeal, which overturned the lower Court’s ruling and declared that Mr Kernott was entitled to half the value of the house because they owned the house in equal shares when they separated and neither had done anything to change the situation since. The Court had to declare the parties’ shares in the property because the couple themselves had not expressed them at the time of purchase or subsequently. Now the Supreme Court has restored the County Court Judgement holding that where it is not possible by direct evidence or inference to ascertain the parties’ intentions, the Court can consider what is fair. With the introduction of the concept of fairness, it will be difficult for Family Lawyers to advice clients as to the likely outcome of their cases, as each case will now turn on its own facts.

Many cohabiting couples are blissfully unaware that they can, and should, sign up to a Living Together Agreement to protect their interest in a property and provide for the circumstances in the event of a relationship breakdown. This case highlights more than ever the fact that cohabiting couples should not leave the determination of their shares to chance but should instead expressly declare what their shares are. Now that bank lending is so restricted, lots of people are entering into different living arrangements, with parents, grandparents, siblings and friends teaming up to buy properties together, without thinking of the possible consequences. It’s not just cohabitants who should be wary.

If you’re unmarried and haven’t made a Will, your estate will pass to your closest blood relative. Unlike married couples, partners aren’t entitled to inherit from each other automatically – something many couples are not aware of.

It is imperative that people put a Living Together Agreement into practice to help formalise their arrangements and protect their equity. A Living Together Agreement should be considered by people buying a property with their partner, those people who already own a property and whose partner is moving in, as well as couples moving into rented accommodation together.

The only way to ensure that property is held as you intend is to make sure you enter into an express declaration of trust in a Living Together Agreement, which can be entered into when you buy a property or even afterwards. And just as you should review your Will on a regular basis, you should review your Living Together Agreement in the same way – circumstances often change over the years.

Even if you are the sole owner of a property, you need to be aware of the law and the possibility that someone with whom you have shared a home and then fallen out with may be able to make a claim to some of your equity.