header-logo header-logo

03 June 2016 / Jonathan Herring
Issue: 7701 / Categories: Features , Family
printer mail-detail

Arresting developments

nlj_7701_herring

Jonathan Herring investigates what behaviour amounts to harassment

Normally when a court order is breached an individual will face sanctions for contempt of court. However, the position in relation to non-molestation orders made under the Family Law Act 1996 (FLA 1996) is a little different. Section 42A of FLA 1996 makes it a criminal offence to breach such an order. This provision was designed to enhance protection to victims of domestic violence by placing responsibility for enforcement in the hands of the police, rather than depending on the victim bring proceedings herself. In particular it was designed to address the concern that a victim of domestic abuse might be threatened by the abuser into not to bringing contempt proceedings.

The facts of O’Neill

In R v O’Neill [2016] EWCA Crim 92, [2016] All ER (D) 216 (Mar) the Court of Appeal had to determine what kinds of breach of a non-molestation order might constitute an offence. Section 42A itself states that any breach of the order amounts to an offence. However, following this decision it is

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Weightmans—Jason Slatcher

Weightmans—Jason Slatcher

Weightmans appoint new Chief Technology Officer

Mishcon de Reya—trainees

Mishcon de Reya—trainees

Mishcon de Reya announces trainee retention rate of 86%

Sackers—Charlotte Adams & Fraser Sutton

Sackers—Charlotte Adams & Fraser Sutton

Sackers welcomes two new Graduate Solicitor Apprentices

NEWS
LexisNexis is delighted to announce the launch of the LexisNexis Legal Awards 2027, celebrating outstanding achievement, innovation and impact across the legal profession
The Legal Services Board (LSB) is to take further enforcement action against the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA), setting additional performance targets and ‘intensifying’ its oversight, it has said
Regulators missed several opportunities to intervene in PM Law Group before it collapsed, an independent review by City firm Jenner & Block has found
An employer’s vicarious liability for the alleged torts of an employee cannot be transferred by TUPE, the Court of Appeal has confirmed
Tiered fees of up to £1,500 for Legal Ombudsman (LeO) cases could leave firms with little option but to pay out, lawyers have warned
back-to-top-scroll