MORE STILL TO BE DONE ON TACKLING DOMESTIC ABUSE 

Published on 01 August, 2024 | Savannah Davies

Within the wide span of cases handled by Hall Brown and other family law firms, it is possible to detect certain emerging patterns over time.

They are dependent on more than an individual household’s circumstances and can be influenced by everything from the global economic climate, government policy, court judgements and even celebrities.

One of the most critical themes in the course of the last decade has arguably been that of domestic abuse.

It has often featured in family courts in proceedings relating to children and the division of joint marital assets.

Recent years have seen government ministers redouble their efforts to tackle abuse, due in part to a greater understanding of how such behaviour occurs and the impact that it has on its victims.

In 2015, for instance, the Serious Crime Act introduced for the first time a specific offence of “controlling or coercive behaviour in intimate or family relationships” (https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2015/9).

When it became clear that such misconduct sometimes continues once couples split up, a new piece of legislation – the Domestic Abuse Act 2020 – extended the definition of controlling behaviour beyond the point of separation (https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2021/17/contents).

Yet data published in the last few weeks by the Ministry of Justice (MoJ) shows that such measures have certainly not eradicated the problem.

It shows that the number of orders made by family courts across the country in relation to domestic abuse has increased by roughly 47 per cent since 2013 (https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/family-court-statistics-quarterly-january-to-march-2024/family-court-statistics-quarterly-january-to-march-2024).

Even within that broad and rather worrying picture, it is possible to detect change.

There are two distinct orders which the family court can make when it comes to domestic abuse.

A non-molestation order (NMO) is similar to a restraining order, instructing the individual subject to it not to contact or harass the other party.

The second type, an occupation order (OO), regulates the occupation of a property and can prohibit someone from entering a property in which their partner, spouse or children live.

Occupation orders are generally regarded as being harder to obtain, not least because it can involve trying to exclude a person from a house which they actually own.

The new MoJ figures reveal that in the last 20 years, the number of occupation orders made by family courts has fallen by more than 80 per cent.

Conversely, the number of non-molestation orders granted has risen by 27 per cent in the last five years alone.

The question, of course, is why that should be the case?

One explanation is that by the time individuals whose relationships have broken down speak to family lawyers, they may no longer be living together, thereby removing the need for occupation orders to be an active consideration.

In addition, police forces across England and Wales are becoming ever more aware of the importance of dealing with domestic abuse whenever and however it arises.

If officers become involved, a potential abuser can be removed from a family home without the need for an application to the family court.

Nevertheless, the various powers available to courts and constabularies do not necessarily seem to be changing behaviour for the better.

Last November, figures published by the Office for National Statistics (ONS) highlighted how there were 43,774 offences of controlling or coercive behaviour during the 12 months to March 2023 – an increase of 6.6 per cent in the space of a year (https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/crimeandjustice/articles/domesticabuseprevalenceandtrendsenglandandwales/yearendingmarch2023).

The need to find a truly effective solution is pressing and may become even more so, given media reports describing how domestic abusers are being released early from prison to ease overcrowding in Britain’s jails despite concerns about the potential for reoffending https://www.thetimes.com/article/5d209466-2d2e-46b5-a2ae-6246eefa2583?shareToken=dcaa81ec8a4dece99e677c94ca8b8cd8).