header-logo header-logo

27 November 2014 / Clive Thomas
Issue: 7632 / Categories: Features , Family
printer mail-detail

Setting limits

thomas

New guidance has been issued on the use of ex parte orders, as Clive Thomas explains

In cases of domestic abuse the court, under Pt IV of the Family Law Act 1996 (FLA 1996), has the power to make occupation and non-molestation injunctions. Such orders can also be made ex parte should the court consider it “just and convenient to do so” (s 45). When determining whether or not to make an ex parte occupation or non-molestation order, the court is to have regard to all the circumstances, including whether:

  1. there is any risk of significant harm to the applicant or a relevant child, attributable to conduct of the respondent, if the order is not made immediately;
  2. it is likely that the applicant will be deterred or prevented from pursuing the application if an order is not made immediately; and
  3. there is reason to believe that the respondent is aware of the proceedings but is deliberately evading service and that the applicant or a relevant child will be seriously prejudiced by the delay involved.

In

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

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

Nikki Bowker, head of litigation and dispute resolution at Devonshires, on career resilience, diversity in law and channelling Elle Woods when the pressure is on

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Leasehold enfranchisement specialist joins residential property team

DWF—Chris Air

DWF—Chris Air

Firm strengthens commercial team in Manchester with partner appointment

NEWS
Contract damages are usually assessed at the date of breach—but not always. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Gascoigne, knowledge lawyer at LexisNexis, examines the growing body of cases where courts have allowed later events to reshape compensation
The Supreme Court has restored ‘doctrinal coherence’ to unfair prejudice litigation, writes Natalie Quinlivan, partner at Fieldfisher LLP, in this week' NLJ
The High Court’s refusal to recognise a prolific sperm donor as a child’s legal parent has highlighted the risks of informal conception arrangements, according to Liam Hurren, associate at Kingsley Napley, in NLJ this week
The Court of Appeal’s decision in Mazur may have settled questions around litigation supervision, but the profession should not simply ‘move on’, argues Jennifer Coupland, CEO of CILEX, in this week's NLJ
A simple phrase like ‘subject to references’ may not protect employers as much as they think. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, analyses recent employment cases showing how conditional job offers can still create binding contracts
back-to-top-scroll