Jakki Smith, who was denied statutory award after death of her partner of 16 years, says her human rights had been breached

This article is more than 2 years old

This article is more than 2 years old

A woman who won her landmark battle for greater legal recognition for bereaved unmarried couples has called for the law to recognise “society has moved on”.

Women: if you’re cohabiting, it doesn’t give you the same rights as a wife | Ayesha Vardag Read more

Jakki Smith, an NHS worker, took the government to court for breaching her human rights in denying her bereavement damages because she was not married to her partner of 16 years when he died.

John Bulloch, a former prison governor, underwent the removal of a benign tumour on his right foot in August 2011 before falling ill while on holiday in Turkey.

Medics had not registered he had a serious infection and he died soon after.

If a couple are married a fixed sum of £12,980 is paid if a spouse dies as a result of negligence, but the same rights do not apply to cohabiting couples in similarly committed relationships.

On Tuesday, the court of appeal allowed her challenge against a high court ruling dismissing her claim. The master of the rolls, Sir Terence Etherton, Lord Justice McCombe and Sir Patrick Elias set aside a ruling by Mr Justice Edis last year.

Edis had held that there was no incompatibility between the 1976 Fatal Accidents Act and Smith’s rights under the European convention, meaning she could not have made a claim.

Passing the original ruling, Edis said the law was in need of reform but said he had no power to intervene.

Smith, 59, from Chorley in Lancashire, said she was “over the moon” and hoped the ruling would have a positive impact on the increasing number of cohabiting couples in the UK.

Why a cohabitation agreement is essential for non-married couples Read more

She will not benefit financially, but said she wanted to help others in a similar position.

“If you are living together the government classes you as a couple for the purpose of payments like council tax and jobseeker’s allowance, so why not when it comes to this? Smith said.



“There’s no longer a taboo around being unmarried. Attitudes have changed, society has moved on and the law needs to be changed to reflect that.

“Nothing will bring John back, but he was a firm believer in everyone being treated equally and I think he would have agreed with me that this is worth fighting for ... My fight has never been for the money – it’s about having meaningful relationships recognised.”

She said the pair had been just as committed as a married couple. “Until John died I hadn’t realised that our relationship would be treated any differently and, when I did, it just struck me as hurtful and unfair that it could be considered less meaningful because of that,” she said.

“John and I had planned a life together, we were in it for the long run and the fact that our bond wasn’t recognised, simply because we hadn’t chosen to marry, was very upsetting.

Smith’s lawyers called on parliament to change the law and “bring … legislation into the 21st century”.

Zak Golombeck, of the law firm Slater and Gordon, said: “This is an historic decision, and one that is long overdue.



“The way we live is changing. Couples are choosing not to marry but this does not detract from the bond they have.”

The Law Commission has previously recommended that cohabiting couples should be eligible for bereavement damages, and the government produced a draft bill in 2009 that was shelved.



In the claim against the secretary of state for justice, Smith’s lawyers argued the current legislation was in breach of articles 8 and 14 of the European convention on human rights – that she was being discriminated against because of her non-marital status and her right to respect for family life.