A comment by Lady Hale has sparked a question over the legal rights for unmarried couples.

The Supreme Court justice expressed her delight by a recent ruling in Scotland by the Edinburgh Court of Session and has called for similar ‘practical and fair’ rulings to be legislated in England and Wales also.

The ruling in question ordered a Scottish man to pay his former partner nearly £40,000 after their relationship broke down.

She said “It does not impose upon unmarried couples the responsibilities of marriage but redresses the gains and losses flowing from their relationship.”

She has also been quoted as being particularly please with how the effects of the Family Law (Scotland) Act introduced in 2006 has improved the lives of cohabiting families who then go on to have children together.

The opposing thought believes that not getting married is a ‘lifestyle choice’ with the consequences of that choice and not taking the legal intuition of marriage vows doesn’t give them any legal rights questioning whether we as a nation should promote couples to marry. This ‘independence of one another’ in turn encourages unmarried mothers and fatherless children which ultimately affects innocent bystanders.