header-logo header-logo

Domestic damage

04 October 2007 / Byron James
Issue: 7291 / Categories: Features , Property
printer mail-detail

The victims of violent domestic abuse need reassurance that their property is protected by the law, says Byron James

The damaging of property can be a significant aspect of domestic abuse; it is, however, poorly dealt with under the current law.

The only section under the Family Law Act 1996 (FLA 1996), Pt IV that deals with property specifically is s 40. This provision, at first glance, would appear to open many doors to a potential applicant. It allows for:
- property to be kept safe, often referred to as a “preservation order” (s 40(1)(d));
- property to be transferred (s 40(1)(c)); and
- the discharge of rent (s 40(1)(a)(ii)).

UNENFORCEABILITY OF S 40

However, despite such lofty promises, this section is fundamentally flawed as there is no provision either in FLA 1996 or elsewhere to deal with enforcement. The Court of Appeal dealt with this specific point in Nwogbe v Nwogbe [2000] Fam Law 797, [2000] 3 FLR 345, where it was held at para 27 that “it is clear…s 40 orders are not enforceable”. While this particular

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

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Firm expands London disputes practice with senior partner hire

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Senior associate promotion strengthens real estate offering

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Leading patent litigator joins intellectual property team

NEWS
The government’s plan to introduce a Single Professional Services Supervisor could erode vital legal-sector expertise, warns Mark Evans, president of the Law Society of England and Wales, in NLJ this week
Writing in NLJ this week, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers argues that the ‘failure to prevent’ model of corporate criminal responsibility—covering bribery, tax evasion, and fraud—should be embraced, not resisted
Professor Graham Zellick KC argues in NLJ this week that, despite Buckingham Palace’s statement stripping Andrew Mountbatten Windsor of his styles, titles and honours, he remains legally a duke
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
back-to-top-scroll