header-logo header-logo

Victim support: practitioners at risk

05 September 2018 / Claire Kitchen
Categories: Features , Profession
printer mail-detail

Claire Kitchen discusses the professional pitfalls of acting for victims of harassment & stalking

  • Protection from harassment and stalking.
  • The anatomy of a perpetrator.
  • Conduct guidance and stalking behaviours.

It is often considered that harassment claims are the remit of family lawyers, and of little or no concern to other practitioners.

It is true that many examples of harassment and stalking fall within the remit of the Family Law Act 1996 (FLA 1996) and can be dealt with by way of a non-molestation order under s 42 of that Act. However, s 42 of FLA 1996 can only apply where specific relationships, defined as ‘associated persons’, can be identified between the parties.

Where FLA1996 cannot assist, the Protection from Harassment Act 1997 (PHA 1997) steps in.

PHA 1997 can be used in several situations to prevent harassment. It may be used alongside a petition under s 994 of the Companies Act 2006, for example, where one of the directors alleges harassment by the other and demands an injunction. Similarly, in a particularly contested

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