241 Pizza

Throughout the relationship, Ms Dowden, an electrical engineer with the London Electricity Board, earned more than Mr Stack, a freelance builder who worked for Hammersmith and Fulham council.

The couple moved in together in 1983 in a house in Kensal Green, bought in Miss Dowden’s name for £30,000 that she paid from her savings and a mortgage in her hame.

Then ten years later they bought the Willesden Green property in both their names for £190,000, using £66,000 in profits from the sale of their previous home, a £65,000 mortgage and £59,000 savings.

In October 2002 the relationship broke down and Mr Stack moved out. He then won a court order that he was entitled to half the proceeds of the house, then worth £770,000.

Ms Dowden appealed and obtained a ruling entitling her to at least 65 per cent of the proceedings.

In a statement to the court she said: “All the money was mine. I earned it from working hard at my job.”

She said: “Barry says £30,000 came from our joint savings. This is not true. We did not have a joint back account. All the money was mine. I earned it from working hard.”

She said that the relationship broke down after Mr Stack “did not want to commit” to the family.

In her ruling, Baroness Hale of Richmond said that the presumption of equal ownership should apply “unless the facts are very unusual.”

Francis Wilkinson, Mr Stack’s barrister, welcomed the ruling, saying it should bring clarity so that unmarried couples should not have to resort to court so frequently to sort out their assets.

“What is clear is that there is a new foundation, and a new structure upon it, for the determination by courts of the shares of separating cohabitants in property they jointly own.”

Mr Wilkinson added: “If nothing else, this judgment should give encouragement to all couples buying a home together without marriage or civil partnership to state clearly, either on the Land Registry transfer form or on a separate deed, the shares in which they own their new home.

“The legal costs of those are insignificant compared with the costs of going to court to sort it out later.”

Experts' responses

Explore Law

• Columnists

• Law Panel

• Law Reports

• Student Law

Times Recommends

• BGC 'set aside £40m to lure Tullett brokers'
• Legal aid review to ensure value
• Fears as 21 magistrates' courts face closure