Married/Civil Partnership/Co habitation equivilency?

I

Itchy

Registered User
Messages
944
I am a public sector worker who is being posted abroad. As part of the posting there is an allowance attached to it. However, the allowance is graded according to your personnal status i.e. there is a 'single' amount and a 'married' amount.

Now obviously married is married but, can the allowance simply be awarded on that basis? Personnally I am neither married nor in a civil partnership but have been co-habiting for a period of time. Would I be entitled on that basis?
 
Going by Department of Social Protection rules, only married or civil partners have extra rights or entitlements that do not include cohabitants, so on that basis I would guess no, but I'm no expert:)
 
Dept of Social Protection does recognise cohabitants for most schemes (widowed/surviving civil partner being the main exception) - it‘s the Revenue Commissioners who only allow a single person's tax credit where only one of a couple is working.
 
No. Department of foreign affairs staff are only paid the married allowance if they are married or in a civil,partnership and as far as I know, all other departments that send people abroad on posting use the dfa allowances scale and definitions.
 
Civil Partnership and Certain Rights and Duties of Cohabitants Act 2010

Section 172 defines cohabitant as one of 2 adults who live together in an intimate and committed relationship. As such maintenance and property orders are possible.

It is this part that may put you in same position as married and civil partners.
 
Try and read S172
and secondly why should marital status drive an allowance?
Presumably its the dependency issue.
That's what S172 is about as it seems that a cohabitant has obligations depending on the relationship that how.
 
There has to be a qualified cohabitant in order for there to be an order, and unless I'm missing something, the definition of a qualified cohabitant is by reference to a relationship that has ended... so unless you're recommending the OP ends their relationship, has their former partner take them to court, and then takes a legal challenge against DFA over their policy, I don't really see the point of what you're saying...

You do a fly one hell of a kite though :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top