header-logo header-logo

Coercive behaviour in family proceedings

28 January 2022 / David Burrows
Issue: 7964 / Categories: Features , Family , Criminal
printer mail-detail
Spotlight on domestic abuse cases: David Burrows examines proof of controlling & coercive behaviour
  • How parties in family proceedings are required to plead proof of domestic abuse, and how controlling and coercive behaviour is proved and dealt with.
  • The meaning of ‘controlling and coercive behaviour’ in legal cases, and how that meaning is translated into practical and procedural outcomes.

In any litigation, civil or criminal, the object of the applicant (or prosecution) is to obtain an order from the court (or a conviction) based on the evidence which applies. The court must consider all relevant facts and make findings on those facts which are in issue between the parties. It must apply the law to the facts as found or as agreed, and come to a decision as to whether the facts justify the order sought by the applicant/claimant.

This article looks at the way in which family courts procedurally require parties to set out (‘plead’) proof of domestic abuse in an individual case; and in particular how controlling and coercive

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

Freeths—Ruth Clare

Freeths—Ruth Clare

National real estate team bolstered by partner hire in Manchester

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Partner appointed head of family team

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

Firm strengthens agriculture and rural affairs team with partner return

NEWS
Conveyancing lawyers have enjoyed a rapid win after campaigning against UK Finance’s decision to charge for access to the Mortgage Lenders’ Handbook
The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) has launched a recruitment drive for talented early career and more senior barristers and solicitors
Regulators differed in the clarity and consistency of their post-Mazur advice and guidance, according to an interim report by the Legal Services Board (LSB)
The dangers of uncritical artificial intelligence (AI) use in legal practice are no longer hypothetical. In this week's NLJ, Dr Charanjit Singh of Holborn Chambers examines cases where lawyers relied on ‘hallucinated’ citations — entirely fictitious authorities generated by AI tools
The Solicitors Act 1974 may still underpin legal regulation, but its age is increasingly showing. Writing in NLJ this week, Victoria Morrison-Hughes of the Association of Costs Lawyers argues that the Act is ‘out of step with modern consumer law’ and actively deters fairness
back-to-top-scroll