This article is devoted to the comparative analysis of the history of development of the marriage in fact Institute in Russia and the USA. The purpose of the analysis of the development of the marriage in fact Institute is conditioned by the increase in the number of marriages in fact at the present time. The results of the National population census in 2010 showed that 13,2% of the adult population are in de facto marriages. Historical analysis allows studying the experience of the actual development of the marriage in fact institution in the past and gives the opportunity to predict the development of this Institute in future. In order to obtain the best results of the investigation, the author uses a comparative law method that allows considering the experience of not only Russia, but also foreign countries. In the article the author examines the causes and approaches to legal recognition and regulation of de facto relations in different historical periods. As a result of the conducted research the author concludes that the original form of marriage was simple cohabitation of men and women. Legal marriage appeared when the state introduced regulations for marriage registration. At the same time in certain historical periods the cohabitation of men and women had legal value due to the social need that had arisen in the society. Based on the above, there are prerequisites for legal recognition of marriages in fact in future, since in 1926 registration of a much smaller number of marriages in fact (7%) resulted in the fact that RSFSR recognized the rights of de facto spouses similar to legal spouses.
marriage in fact, de facto partner, de facto marriage, concubinage, cohabitation of men and women, common law marriage, children of unwed parents, comparative analysis, matrimonial relations.
1. Friedman L. M. A History of American Law. 2nd ed. N. Y., 1973.
2. Friedman L. M. Law in America: A Short History. N. Y., 2002.
3. Howard G. E. A History of Matrimonial Institutions Chiefly in England and the United States with an Introductory Analysis of the Literature and the Theories of Primitive Marriage and the Family. Vol. 2. N. Y., 1964.
4. Antokol´skaya M. V. Semeynoe pravo: uchebnik. 3-e izd. M., 2010.
5. Btikeeva M. A. Rimskoe chastnoe pravo: ucheb. posobie. Omsk, 2011.
6. Genkin D. M., Novitskiy I. B., Rabinovich N. V. Istoriya sovetskogo grazhdanskogo prava. M., 1949.
7. Gorchakov M. I. O tayne supruzhestva. M.; SPb., 1880.
8. Grazhdanskoe i torgovoe pravo kapitalisticheskikh gosudarstv. M., 1966.
9. Kovaleva A. V. Transformatsiya ponyatiya «grazhdanskiy brak» kak proyavlenie krizisa semeynykh otnosheniy: avtoref. dis.... kand. sotsiol. nauk. Khabarovsk, 2009.
10. Grafskiy V. G. Vseobshchaya istoriya prava i gosudarstva: uchebnik dlya vuzov. M., 2000.
11. Zagorovskiy A. I. Kurs semeynogo prava. Odessa, 1909.
12. Istoriya gosudarstva i prava zarubezhnykh stran: uchebnik dlya vuzov: v 2 ch. 2-e izd. / pod red. N. A. Krasheninnikovoy i O. A. Zhidkova. Ch. 2. M., 1998.
13. Kovaleva A. V. Transformatsiya ponyatiya «grazhdanskiy brak» kak proyavlenie krizisa semeynykh otnosheniy: avtoref. dis.... kand. sotsiol. nauk. Khabarovsk, 2009.
14. Lafitskiy V. I. Osnovy konstitutsionnogo stroya SShA. M., 1998.
15. Novitskiy I. B. Rimskoe pravo. M., 1995.
16. Pobedonostsev K. P. Kurs grazhdanskogo prava: v 3 t. T. 2: Pervyy otdel: Semeynye otnosheniya. SPb., 1896.
17. Pokrovskiy I. A. Istoriya rimskogo prava. Dostup iz SPS «Konsul´tantPlyus».
18. Pukhan I., Polinak-Akhimovskaya M. Rimskoe pravo. M., 1999.
19. Sverdlov G. M. Brak i razvod. M.; L., 1949.
20. Khazova O. A. Brak i razvod v burzhuaznom semeynom prave (sravnitel´no-pravovoy analiz). M., 1988.
21. Khvostov V. M. Sistema rimskogo prava. M., 1996.
22. Khudyakova O. Yu. Ustanovlenie proiskhozhdeniya detey po zakonodatel´stvu RF i SShA: sravnitel´noe issledovanie: dis.... kand. yurid. nauk. M., 2009.
