Maria and Homer are not married and in order to apply for a protective order Part IV of the FLA Maria will have to come within the definition of "associated persons" as prescribed by the FLA (A Diduck., & F Kaganas., 2006). Section 62 of the FLA defines "associated persons" and section 62(3) expressly includes cohabitants within the definition of "associated persons". Furthermore, section 62(1) (a) of the FLA defines "cohabitants" as being "a man and woman who, although not married to each other, are living together as husband and wife", which is ultimately a question of fact (S Gore., 2007).
Key Words: Family Law Act 1996, FLA, Non-Molestation Order, Occupation Order, Associated Persons, Domestic Violence, Cohabitation, The Domestic Violence, Crime and Victims Act 2004, Children Act 1989, Enforcement.
[...] favour to indicate that she and Homer were both “cohabitants” for the purpose of falling under the FLA definition of “associated persons,” which leads us to consider the potential protective remedies available to Maria against Homer under the FLA What Court orders are available to Maria? How would the advice differ if Maria and Homer were married? As stated in the previous section, the two potential court orders available to Maria are a non-molestation order and occupation order and I shall deal with each in turn. [...]
[...] the court shall have regard to all the circumstances including the need to secure the health, safety and well being of the applicant”. If we apply this to Maria's situation, it is highly likely that the fact that she suffered concussion, coupled with Homer's recurrent violent behaviour will suffice to justify a non-molestation order (Lowestein 2005). As the primary objective under Section 42 of the FLA is to secure Maria's health and safety, it is possible that the order may be imposed for a specified period of time until Homer completes rehabilitation and help for his violent behaviour as he has promised. [...]
[...] Whilst the court can accept undertakings in relation to an occupation order, there is no power of arrest available in respect of undertakings (Bird 2002). Accordingly, from Maria's perspective the non-molestation order is likely to offer the strongest form of protective remedy. BIBLIOGRAPHY Barlow, A., Duncan, S., James, G., and Park, A., Cohabitation, Marriage and the Law-Social Change and Legal Reform in the 21st Century. Oxford Hart Publishing 2005 Bird, Domestic Violence Law & Practice, Family Law Series London (2002) Burton, M., “Domestic Violence From Consultation to Bill” [2004] Fam Law 128. Choudhury., & Herring., (2006). Righting Domestic Violence. [...]
[...] 2nd Edition Gore., (2007). In Practice: the Domestic Violence, Crime and Victims Act 2004 and Family Law Act Injunctions. Family Law Journal 37. Herring., (2007). Family law. 3rd Edition Longman HMCPSI Violence at Home: A joint thematic Inspection of the Investigation and Prosecution of Cases Involving Domestic Violence 2004. Home Office., (2003). Safety & Justice: The Government's proposals on Domestic Violence. Home Office London. Available at www.homeoffice.gov.uk Home Office (1999). Living without fear- an integrated approach to tackling violence against women. [...]
[...] Published by The Women's Unit, Cabinet Office. Home Office (2002). Domestic Violence: Break the Chain Multi-Agency Guidance for Addressing Domestic Violence. Available at www.homeoffice.gov.uk Lowe., & Douglas., (2006). Bromley's Family Law. 10th Revised Edition LexisNexis UK. L.F., Lowestein (2005). Domestic Violence: Recent Research. Police Journal. Claire McGlynn., (2006) Families and [...]
APA Style reference
For your bibliographyOnline reading
with our online readerContent validated
by our reading committee
