-- Romford family law firm Signature Law has welcomed Government proposals that would remove the need for most separating cohabitants to bring claims under the Trusts of Land and Appointment of Trustees Act 1996, while warning that the reforms as drafted stop well short of the protection many clients assume they already have.
The Ministry of Justice Green Paper A Fairer End to Relationships, published on 5 June 2026, proposes a new statutory scheme under which qualifying cohabitants could apply to the court for a lump sum order, a property transfer order or a pension sharing order on separation. Under the proposals, cohabitants who meet the qualifying definition and have not opted out would no longer need to rely on TOLATA for a claim against property. The consultation closed on 14 August 2026 and the Government is now considering the responses.
At present, disputes between separating cohabitants over the shared home are determined in the civil courts under ordinary principles of property and trust law, most often through a TOLATA claim, frequently involving arguments that a party acquired a beneficial interest through a common intention constructive trust. Civil courts hearing TOLATA claims cannot award maintenance, share pensions or make lump sum payments based on need. Their powers are largely confined to determining ownership and ordering a sale. Where there are children, a separate claim for their benefit can be made in the family court under Schedule 1 of the Children Act 1989.
Sital Somaiya, Founder and Solicitor at Signature Law, said:
“TOLATA asks one question: who owns what. It does not ask what either person actually needs. That is the whole problem in a sentence. A parent who stepped back from work for a decade to raise children can discover that the years they invested count for nothing, because the mortgage happened to be in their partner’s sole name. The court has no power to fix that. It is not the judge’s fault. It is the wrong statute for the job.”
The firm, whose founder holds the Law Society’s Family Law Advanced Accreditation and which handles cohabitation and property disputes alongside divorce, children matters and conveyancing, says the practical consequence is cost. TOLATA claims are fact-heavy, evidence-heavy and hard to settle early, because the outcome turns on reconstructing what two people intended years ago.
“These cases are expensive precisely because they are uncertain,” Ms Somaiya said. “You are asking a court to work out what a couple silently understood about ownership in 2014. Both sides remember it differently, and both remember it in their own favour. Meanwhile the legal costs eat the very asset they are arguing about.”
Under the proposed scheme, couples would qualify if they have lived together for at least three years or have a child together. Claims would be subject to a two-year limitation period running from separation, couples would be able to opt out by agreement subject to safeguards, and clean breaks would be the default. The Government has stated that the sharing principle applied on divorce would not extend to cohabiting couples, and that remedies would be assessed against essential rather than discretionary needs.
Ms Somaiya said:
“It is important that people hear this clearly: this is a Green Paper, not a Bill. Nothing has changed in the law today. And when it does change, the framework being proposed is deliberately narrower than divorce. No sharing principle, needs read more tightly, and a two-year clock. TOLATA also does not disappear. Anyone outside the qualifying definition, anyone who has opted out, and anyone who leaves it too late will still be in the civil courts arguing about trusts.”
The firm identifies the two-year limitation period as its principal concern about the proposals.
“Two years sounds generous until you meet the people it affects,” Ms Somaiya said. “Someone leaving a controlling relationship is often not in a position to issue a court application within two years. They are rebuilding. The provision most likely to catch out the very people this reform is meant to protect is the deadline.”
Signature Law is advising cohabiting clients not to wait for legislation: to establish now how their property is legally held, to record their intentions in a written cohabitation agreement, and to ensure a valid will is in place.
On the spokesperson
Sital Somaiya is the founder and director of Signature Law and an experienced broadcast commentator. She has appeared on BBC One’s The One Show and on ITV News, where she commented on England’s largest divorce settlement, involving the ruler of Dubai. She received the Gold Award at the Merton Partnership Civic Pride Volunteer Awards 2023, recognising her volunteering through the South West London Law Centre. She is available for comment, background briefing or written commentary on the consultation proposals and on TOLATA practice.
About Signature Law
Signature Law is a Romford-based law firm specialising in family law, residential and commercial conveyancing, and wills, probate and estate planning. It was founded by solicitor Sital Somaiya, who holds the Law Society’s Family Law Advanced Accreditation. The firm holds Conveyancing Quality Scheme accreditation and Lexcel practice management accreditation, offers legal aid in eligible family matters, and advises clients in a number of languages, including Gujarati, Hindi and Urdu. Signature Law is a trading name of Signature Law Limited, authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority as a Licensed Body, SRA number 832332. Registered in England and Wales, company number 13684385.
Contact Info:
Name: Sital Somaiya, Founder and Solicitor
Email: Send Email
Organization: Signature Law
Address: Charter House, First Floor, 123 South Street, Romford, RM1 1NX
Phone: 01708 398 851
Website: https://signaturelaw.co.uk
Release ID: 89208622
In the event of detecting errors, concerns, or irregularities in the content shared in this press release that require attention or if there is a need for a press release takedown, we kindly request that you inform us promptly by contacting [email protected] (it is important to note that this email is the authorized channel for such matters, sending multiple emails to multiple addresses does not necessarily help expedite your request). Our dedicated team will promptly address your feedback within 8 hours and take necessary actions to resolve any identified issues diligently or guide you through the removal process. Providing accurate and dependable information is our utmost priority.
