What might a court consider when making equitable awards regarding property rights for unmarried cohabitants?

When a court is making equitable awards regarding property rights for unmarried cohabitants, it often looks at the agreements and understandings that exist between the parties about how they intend to share property. An implied or express agreement to share property is a significant factor because it reflects the intentions and mutual understandings of the cohabitants. Such agreements may not be formalized in a written contract but can be inferred from their conduct or expressions over the duration of the relationship.

This consideration is essential in determining how property is divided or what rights one party may have regarding the property acquired during the relationship. Courts aim to achieve fairness based on the contributions made by each party and any expectations they may have had about sharing property or assets. In contrast, while a written contract could potentially provide clear terms regarding property rights, not all cohabiting couples create formal agreements. Similarly, the duration of the relationship and the legal marital status of the parties are relevant factors that may influence a court's decision, but they do not directly address the equitable distribution of property based on the parties' intentions regarding sharing that property. Thus, the emphasis on agreements—whether implied or express—captures the essence of how cohabitants might approach ownership and sharing of property in the absence of marriage.