The Guardian
Judge rules Joy Williams can make claim against estate of Norman Martin, with whom she lived in ‘loving and committed’ relationship
Joy Williams: ‘What has been traumatic for me is that this level of serious relationship is not recognised by the law.’ Photograph: Jan Colley/PA
A woman has won a legal battle after half the home she shared with her partner of almost two decades passed to his estranged wife after his death.
Joy Williams expressed her “relief and delight” after a judge at the central London county court ruled in her favour on Tuesday.
Williams, 69, lived with Norman Martin for 18 years, but he remained married to his wife. Williams and Martin owned their three-bedroom home in Dorchester, Dorset, as tenants in common, which meant the property – now valued at about £320,000 – did not automatically pass to Williams after her partner’s deathin 2012.
At a recent hearing, Judge Nigel Gerald was urged to award her Martin’s half share of the house, which they bought in 2009, “so that she has some security for the future”.
On Tuesday, Williams was in court as the judge explained, in a ruling lasting almost four hours, that she had established that she was entitled to make a claim against the estate of Martin, a dentist. He died of a heart attack aged 69.
The “fair and reasonable result”, the judge concluded, was that she should “retain an absolute interest” in the house where she and Martin had lived as husband and wife in a “loving and committed” relationship.
Maureen Martin, 73, the dentist’s widow, who was not in court, was ordered to pay £100,000 on account of costs within 42 days pending a detailed assessment. Her counsel, James Weale, said she did not have the money and described the sum as “eye-watering”.
Mrs Martin’s daughter, Louise, said later: “My mother has been a loyal, faithful wife. She has devoted herself to her husband and her family. She has tried to act reasonably in this matter. We feel that the decision today has been most unfair and we intend to appeal.”
After the ruling, Williams said: “I am relieved and delighted that this case is finally over because it has taken a huge toll on me and my family.
“I was with Norman for 18 years and those were very happy times. I loved him, he loved me and I still treasure his memory.
“All I wanted was for the court to recognise that I needed to have his share of the house that was our home to provide me with some security for my future and this judgment has done just that.
“I believe that that is what Norman would have wanted for me. The judge’s decision means I can now stay in my home and my future is much more secure as I have the freedom to sell the property in the future when I need to.
“What has been traumatic for me is that this level of serious relationship is not currently recognised by the law and I therefore had to bring this claim in court to achieve some security and to obtain this result.
“I hope my situation raises awareness for others to consider their own financial position in relation to their partner and consider whether they need to take advice to protect their each other in future.”
Will dispute lawyers at Irwin Mitchell, who represented Williams, said the case showed the need for “cohabitation laws to be brought into the 21st century” and highlighted the need for couples living together to have cohabitation agreements in place and up-to-date wills.
Paula Myers, national head of the firm’s wills, trust and estates dispute team, said: “This has been a long, hard and emotionally exhausting battle for Joy.”
