Domestic abuse

Domestic abuse

In cases where there have been incidents of domestic abuse it may be appropriate to seek the court's protection with an application for a non-molestation order and/or an occupation order under the Family Law Act 1996 (FLA 1996).

Under FLA 1996 the court also has the power to make a non-molestation order even where no application has been made, where, in other family proceedings to which the respondent is a party, it considers the order should be made for the benefit of any other party to the proceedings or any relevant child.

Applications for non-molestation orders and occupation orders are governed by the Family Procedure Rules 2010 (FPR 2010), SI 2010/2955, Pt 10 and the supporting practice direction, FPR 2010, PD 10A.

Non-molestation orders

A non-molestation order confers protection on family members, including children or people in a domestic relationship, against the use of violence or other forms of molestation by a person with whom they are associated. There are eight classes of applicants who are associated persons, including married or divorced couples, civil partners and engaged or formerly engaged couples.

There

To view the latest version of this document and thousands of others like it, sign-in with LexisNexis or register for a free trial.

TAKE A FREE TRIAL

Latest Family News

Event to mark the 25th anniversary of the Civil Procedure Rule Committee and to launch the work of the Online Procedure Rule Committee

On 16 July 2025, the Master of the Rolls and Lord Justice Birss gave speeches at an event hosted by the Ministry of Justice and The Law Society. The event marked the 25th anniversary of the Civil Procedure Rule Committee (CPRC) and launched the public engagement work carried out by the Online Procedure Rule Committee (OPRC).

Family weekly highlights—24 July 2025

This week's edition of the Family weekly highlights includes analysis of the Court of Appeal’s decision on post-adoption contact and consideration of the court's jurisdiction to set aside pension sharing orders. Recent judgments on extended orders under section 91(14) of the Children Act 1989 and the jurisdictional basis to make an application for a legal services payment order are also considered.

Need to undertake holistic risk assessment. Section 31 of the Children Act 1989—Care orders. Adoption and Children Act 2002 (Re H)

Local Government analysis: This Court of Appeal judgment provides a reminder to judges when making final care orders (or declining to do so as in this case) of the need to undertake a careful and holistic risk assessment within any final judgment. The judgment is a clear reminder of the need to assess risk with reference to the facts and as set against the welfare checklist and to properly analyse all parts of the evidence heard and illustrate this in the judgement. The court determined that the evaluation required a careful analysis of the evidence which regrettably was not carried out in this case. Written by Hannah Markham KC, head of team at 36 Family.

Post adoption contact—where are we now? (Re S (Placement Order Contact))

Family analysis: The Court of Appeal judgment in Re S (Placement Order Contact) carefully considers the court’s approach to contact between siblings at the placement for adoption stage. There has been a shift in recent years with a great deal of research as to the potential advantages to adopted children of maintaining some sort of direct contact with their birth family. That being said, on the ground it remains unusual for orders to be made under section 26 of the Adoption and Children Act 2002 (ACA 2002) for direct contact, with proposals in final care plans often being for indirect or letterbox contact. The Court of Appeal makes clear that in each case where placement orders are made, there needs to be a bespoke analysis of the future contact arrangements, in order to meet the complex and life-long needs of children who are to be placed for adoption. Written by Gemma Adams, associate solicitor at Dawson Cornwell LLP.