Dermot Ahern (Louth, Fianna Fail)

Absolutely. The normal designation in any legislation of this nature is the use of the term "living as husband and wife". That is the phrase we normally use. We have had to come up with a similar phrase in this case, obviously, as we cannot use the phrase "husband and wife" in the context of a provision that will apply to same-sex partners. We have come up with the term "intimate and committed" for these purposes. Given that former cohabitants can potentially face onerous court obligations under this redress scheme, it is right and proper that the situation would have to be one of commitment. The behaviour of either party at the time when the relationship was breaking up is not a factor for the court to consider in making its determination. Section 169(2) clearly indicates:

In determining whether or not 2 adults are cohabitants, the court shall take into account all the circumstances of the relationship and in particular shall have regard to the following:

(a) the duration of the relationship;

(b) the basis on which the couple live together;

(c) the degree of financial dependence of either adult on the other and any agreements in respect of their finances;

(d) the degree and nature of any financial arrangements between the adults including any joint purchase of an estate or interest in land or joint acquisition of personal property;

(e) whether there are one or more dependent children;

(f) whether one of the adults cares for and supports the children of the other; and

(g) the degree to which the adults present themselves to others as a couple.

The seven factors that are listed are not exclusive.

In order to give certainty regarding who complies with this provision, I suggest that the terminology "intimate and committed" is preferable to the one suggested by the Deputies, which is simply "an intimate relationship".

See this speech in context