Domestic abuse can obviously be exacerbated by the fact that the parties are both still living in the same home. The law therefore enables the court to make an order regulating who may live in the family home. This is called an ‘occupation order’.
In most situations a victim of abuse can apply to the court for an occupation order, but just what can an occupation order do, and how will the court decide whether to make one?
Exactly what an occupation order can do will depend upon the circumstances of the case, such as whether the parties are married, and whether the home is owned or rented.
However, whatever the circumstances there are basically four things that an occupation order can do:
1. Require the other party to allow the applicant back into the property, or part of the property. Obviously, this can be used where the applicant has been forced to leave the property due to the other party’s abuse.
2. Regulate the occupation of the property by either or both of the parties, for example by stating which parts of the property each party may occupy, where the accommodation at the property is such as to allow the parties to live separately within it.
3. Require the respondent to leave the property, or part of the property. The order may specify that the respondent can return to the property for certain defined purposes, such as collecting and returning children for contact.
4. Exclude the respondent from a defined area around the property.
The order may also prohibit the other party from obstructing or interfering with the applicant’s occupation of the property.
In addition it may include provisions for such things as who should maintain the property, who should pay the mortgage/rent/other outgoings, who can keep and use the furniture, and so on.
Exceptionally, an occupation order can be made without giving notice to the other party. However, the court will fix a hearing date and the other party can oppose the continuation of the order at that hearing.
Lastly, the order will state how long it is to last. Exactly how long it can last will depend upon the circumstances of the case.
The specific factors that the court is required to take into account before deciding whether to make an occupation order will again depend upon the circumstances of the case.
However, in general the court will consider all of the circumstances of the case, and in particular:
1. The housing needs and resources of both of the parties and any children. Clearly, for example, a party looking after children will have greater housing needs than a party not looking after children.
2. The financial resources of both parties – one of the parties may, for example, be in a much better position financially to rehouse themselves.
3. The likely effect any order, or not making an order, will have on the parties and any children. If, for example, the other party has nowhere else to live, then obviously making an occupation order requiring them to leave the home and therefore making them homeless will be a far more serious matter. On the other hand, if the court considers that the victim and any children may suffer harm by the other party remaining in the property then it will be more likely to order the other party to leave.
4. The conduct of the parties in relation to each other. Obviously, the more serious the abuse by the other party, the more likely it is that the court will order them to leave the home.
If you are the victim of domestic abuse you should seek expert legal advice as soon as possible. We can provide you with that advice.
For more information about our domestic abuse services, and how to get in touch, see this page.
Care proceedings are an extremely daunting prospect for any parent to face. It is therefore important that they understand the court process involved.
Care proceedings will be commenced when the local authority is concerned that a child in its area has suffered, or is at risk of suffering, significant harm attributable to either the care given to the child, or likely to be given to them, not being what it would be reasonable to expect a parent to give them, or to the child being beyond parental control.
Care proceedings are a last resort, pursued only after exhausting efforts to keep the child with their birth family.
A pre-proceedings meeting will usually take place as a final attempt to prevent the matter going to court. Parents will receive a letter from the council before the meeting, outlining concerns and inviting attendance. The council will clearly communicate parental expectations regarding their child. Failure to meet these may lead to care proceedings
Once the proceedings have been issued the exact procedure will vary from case to case, depending upon the circumstances. However, the basic procedure takes place in three stages: the Case Management Hearing, the Issues Resolution Hearing, and the Final Hearing.
The Case Management Hearing is usually the first hearing that takes place, fixed when the proceedings are issued. The hearing is typically brief, with the court providing directions for the next steps.
In order to decide what should happen next the court will review the council’s application and its plans for the child (set out in a ‘care plan’), identify the main issues in the case, and what evidence will be required to enable the court to resolve those issues.
Evidence will comprise written statements from parents expressing their views and any necessary expert reports filed. The court may also want other family members to be assessed as potential carers for the child.
A timetable for that evidence, and for next stages in the case, will then be set by the court. The court will usually want the case to be completed within 26 weeks, although this deadline can be extended.
The purpose of the Issues Resolution Hearing is to see whether everyone involved is able to agree upon long-term plans for the child, including where the child should live and what contact anyone should have with them.
If agreement is reached, then this might be the final hearing.
If no agreement can be reached, the hearing identifies and narrows issues for the Final Hearing. The court will also fix a date for the Final Hearing.
At the final hearing, which will usually take place over several days, the court will hear (or read) all of the evidence, and make its final decisions.
The decisions that the court will make will be about the long-term care arrangements for the child, what contact the child should have with anyone, such as parents or other family members, and what orders, if any, are needed to put those arrangements in place.
The orders that the court can make include: a care order placing the child in the care of the local authority; a supervision order placing the child under the supervision of the local authority (the child will usually remain with the family); a special guardianship order placing the child with someone other than their parents; and a placement order authorising the local authority to place the child for adoption.
Please contact us if you require any further information.
For more information about care proceedings and how we can help, see this page.
As we reported here recently, the government has shelved its plans to make mediation compulsory in most family cases. However, the courts are themselves taking steps to ensure that more family cases are resolved via ‘non-court dispute resolution’.
Before we look at how the courts are going to do this, we first need to consider exactly what is meant by ‘non-court dispute resolution’.
The steps that the courts are going to take are contained in new rules, which will come into force on the 29th of April. One of the rules provides a definition of ‘non-court dispute resolution’.
The rules state that ‘non-court dispute resolution’ means methods of resolving issues other than through the court process, including, but not limited to, mediation, arbitration, evaluation by a neutral third party (such as a private Financial Dispute Resolution process) and collaborative law.
Briefly, the methods specifically mentioned are:
Mediation: A process of assisted negotiation, where an independent mediator helps couples resolve issues. For more information on mediation, see this page.
Arbitration: Whereby the parties agree to have a neutral third party (the arbitrator) make a binding decision on the dispute. For more information on arbitration, see this page.
Private FDR: Whereby the parties to a financial remedies dispute pay for a financial remedy specialist to act as a private judge, who will endeavour to help the parties to resolve the dispute by agreement.
Collaborative law: Whereby each party has a lawyer who is trained specifically in collaborative law, and the parties and their lawyers work together to find a solution to the dispute. For more information on collaborative law, see this page.
So what will change on the 29th of April?
The first thing to say is that the new rules will not mean that it will be compulsory for the parties in a family case to engage in non-court dispute resolution. The word that the rules use is “encourage” – i.e. the intention is to encourage the parties in all suitable cases to consider the use of methods of resolution outside of court.
Specifically, the new rules will do three things, in addition to providing a new definition.
The first thing the rules will do is enable the court to require the parties to set out in writing their views on using non-court dispute resolution as a means of resolving the matters raised in the proceedings. Obviously, this will not only inform the court but also encourage the parties to actively consider using methods of resolution outside of court.
The second thing the rules will do is make provision for the court to use the timetabling of proceedings to encourage non-court dispute resolution. A key difference to the old rules here is that whereas under the old rules the court could only adjourn the proceedings to enable non-court dispute resolution to take place where the parties agreed, under the new rules the court will not need the agreement of the parties.
The third thing the rules will do is possibly the most significant, in relation to financial remedy proceedings. At the conclusion of such proceedings the court may make an order for costs against one of the parties if that party failed without good reason to attend a Mediation Information and Assessment Meeting (‘MIAM’) or non-court dispute resolution.
Exactly what all of this may mean in practice was indicated by Mrs Justice Knowles in a recent judgment, in which she referred to the new rules and said: “Going forward, parties to financial remedy and private law children proceedings can expect – at each stage of the proceedings – the court to keep under active review whether non-court dispute resolution is suitable in order to resolve the proceedings. Where this can be done safely, the court is very likely to think this process appropriate especially where the parties and their legal representatives have not engaged meaningfully in any form of non-court dispute resolution before issuing proceedings.”
Clearly, the intention is that in significantly fewer cases will the parties require the courts to adjudicate the matter for them.
For further information on how we can help, please see our Family Mediation page.
Walker Family Law is an award-winning family law practice, recognised as one of the leading family law firms in the South West of England with services covering family law & mediation, divorce law, child-law and arbitration.
Walker Family Law, a leading family law firm in the Southwest, is delighted to announce the promotion of three outstanding members of its team: Natasha Alsop, who has been promoted to Associate Solicitor, Emilie Haine, also promoted to Associate Solicitor and Lucy Roberts, promoted to Senior Associate Solicitor.
These promotions come as a testament to the dedication and loyalty demonstrated by Natasha, Emilie and Lucy. Each individual has showcased exceptional legal expertise, unwavering professionalism, and a genuine passion for advocating on behalf of families facing challenging circumstances.
Natasha Alsop specialises in diverse matters including divorce, child arrangements, and complex financial disputes, Natasha is known for her pragmatic advice and devotion to client-focused solutions. Her promotion underscores her exceptional performance and dedication to achieving positive outcomes for clients.
Emilie Haine has specialised exclusively in child-related matters since qualifying as a Solicitor in 2016. Her expertise spans private law cases, including disputes between parents, child abduction and international relocation. With a focus on protecting victims of abuse, Emilie provides comprehensive legal support to families navigating challenging circumstances.
Lucy Roberts is recognised for her expertise in private law children matters. Accredited under the Law Society’s Family Law Advanced Scheme as a specialist in International Child Abduction and Wardship, Lucy is among the few solicitors in the Southwest with such credentials. Her experience in working with international child contact cases further evidences her devotion to advocating for the best interests of children and families.
Ian Walker, Managing Director, expressed his pride in the achievements of Natasha, Emilie and Lucy, stating, “We are thrilled to recognise the exceptional talent within our team through these well-deserved promotions. Natasha, Emilie, and Lucy have consistently proven their commitment to excellence and enthusiasm for supporting our clients through their legal journeys”.
The promotions reinforce Walker Family Law’s dedication to fostering a culture of professional growth and development. By recognising and rewarding outstanding performance, the firm continues to advance its mission of delivering unparalleled legal services to their clients, rooted in progression and resolution-oriented approaches.
If a parent has been found by the court to have seriously abused the other parent, or even their children, should the court then still be able to allow them to have contact with the children, or should the finding of abuse mean that there should be no contact?
It is a difficult question, and an MP, who herself has personal experience of court proceedings dealing with this situation, is proposing a change to the law.
The MP is Kate Kniveton. Before we look at what she is proposing, we need to look at the law as it is at present.
Judge Lieven established current law in final hearing of Ms. Kniveton’s case.
In the case, which concerned arrangements for Ms Kniveton’s child, the court had made some very serious findings of domestic abuse against the father, including that he had physically and verbally assaulted Ms Kniveton, and even that he had raped her.
Despite these findings, the court initially decided that the father should continue to have contact with the child, at a contact centre, and even that Ms Kniveton should pay half of the contact centre fees.
In her judgment Mrs Justice Lieven explained the law as it stands at present, which states that where there are findings of domestic abuse the court should only make an order for contact if it is satisfied that the safety of the child and the parent with whom the child is living can, as far as possible, be secured before, during and after contact, and that the parent with whom the child is living will not be subjected to further domestic abuse by the other parent.
Mrs. Justice Lieven halted direct contact between child and father due to safety concerns for child and Ms. Kniveton.
In the light of her experiences Ms Kniveton, who feels that the present law came “dangerously close” to letting her down, is now calling upon the government to change the law to bring about a presumption of no contact between an abusive parent and their children.
Whether such a presumption is introduced remains to be seen, but Justice Minister Mike Freer has confirmed that a review into the current presumption of parental involvement, which states that it is generally in a child’s best interests to have a relationship with both parents, will be published by “late spring or early summer”.
Should laws on contact between domestic abusers and children be strengthened, as Ms. Kniveton suggests, or kept the same?
Clearly, the safety of the child and the abused parent must be protected at all costs, as is the case with the law as it stands at present, and a presumption of no contact would fit in with this.
But on the other hand the welfare of the child is paramount, and there may well be cases where the child’s welfare dictates that they should continue to have contact with a parent, despite the fact that that parent has been found to be abusive. In such cases a presumption of no contact could work against the child’s welfare.
We will leave the last word to Ms Kniveton.
Speaking in the Commons she said: “Despite the court confirming that my child’s father was abusive, a rapist, it was decided that contact should continue through a contact centre and that I should pay for 50% of the cost of that contact.
“I couldn’t believe that anyone felt that my child, whom I’d been fighting to protect, would benefit from further contact with such an abusive and violent man, and that I, someone who had been subjected to that violent behaviour, should not only facilitate that contact, but also pay towards it.”
If you’re experiencing domestic abuse, seeking legal help promptly is crucial for your safety and well-being.
For more information about domestic abuse and how we can help, see this page.
On the face of it, a child arrangements order is quite simple: it states with which parent(s) the child should live and, if with only one, what contact the child should have with the other parent.
But there can be much more to child arrangements orders.
Here we look a little more closely at what exactly a child arrangements order is, and what it can include, apart from simply setting out living and contact arrangements.
The starting point is the statutory definition in the Children Act 1989 for a child arrangements order.
The Act states:
“child arrangements order” means an order regulating arrangements relating to any of the following—
(a) with whom a child is to live, spend time or otherwise have contact, and
(b) when a child is to live, spend time or otherwise have contact with any person”
Note firstly that the definition is not limited to parents. A child arrangements order can also be made in relation to someone else, such as a grandparent.
Courts can order a child to live with multiple people, like splitting time between parents, without any restrictions.
Another point to note from the definition is the reference to spending time or otherwise having contact. What is the difference between the two?
‘Spend time’ means direct face-to-face contact between the child and the individual, including daytime or overnight visits.
‘Otherwise have contact’ refers to other types of indirect contact, such as video call, telephone, messaging, letters, email, and so on. It can also include such things as the sending of school reports and medical information by the parent with whom the child lives to the other parent.
Contact can also be supervised or unsupervised. Supervised contact will be ordered where the court is not sure that it would be safe for the child to spend time solely in the care of one person, so it orders that it should be supervised by a trustworthy person, such as a relative or the staff at a contact centre (see below).
A child arrangements order may also include directions and conditions.
These can include such things as where children should be ‘handed over’ at the start and end of direct contact; who may be present when the handover takes place; who should supervise the contact; and how the parties may communicate between themselves.
Conditions may include prohibiting alcohol or non-prescribed drugs for a set period before or during the child’s visitation.
The court may order contact at a child contact centre if it deems it beneficial for the child’s welfare.
In such cases the court order will state the name of the contact centre, who will provide the centre with a copy of the order, who will complete the contact centre referral form, and who will pay any costs charged by the centre. It will specify who brings the child to the centre and if they can be present during the contact session.
Centre staff may support or supervise the contact, aiding its smooth progress or observing and providing reports on the session.
Lastly, a child arrangements order may also contain ‘activity directions’ or ‘activity conditions’, requiring a person to take part in an activity that would, in the opinion of the court, “help to establish, maintain or improve the involvement in the life of the child concerned of that individual, or another individual who is a party to the proceedings.”
Activities may include such things as parenting classes, and programmes to address violent behaviour.
For more information about child arrangements, and the services we offer, see this page.
The term “domestic abuse” only began to be commonly used in the context of family law relatively recently. Before that, we all used the term “domestic violence”.
As the name suggests, “domestic violence” essentially referred to acts or threats of violence by one partner against the other. But this was limiting. Abusive behaviour isn’t just violence; it manifests in various other forms beyond threats or physical harm between partners.
And so the term “domestic abuse” began to be used. But what exactly is domestic abuse?
Until the passing of the Domestic Abuse Act 2001 there was in fact no statutory definition of domestic abuse.
The Act remedied that omission and, in doing so, made it clear to all just what can constitute domestic abuse.
The definition begins simply. Domestic abuse involves abusive behaviour between two individuals aged 16 or older who are personally connected to each other.
But apart from making clear that the two people must be over 16 and “personally connected” (for example married, in an intimate personal relationship with each other, or relatives), this is not particularly helpful.
The definition therefore goes on to specify what kind of behaviour is “abusive”. It states that behaviour is “abusive” if it consists of any of the following:
(a) physical or sexual abuse;
(b) violent or threatening behaviour;
(c) controlling or coercive behaviour;
(d) economic abuse (see below); or
(e) psychological, emotional or other abuse.
Further, the definition of domestic abuse doesn’t hinge on whether it’s a single incident or a pattern of behaviour.
The definition extends beyond mere violence or threats, as previously indicated. In particular, coercive and controlling behaviour, very often a feature of domestic abuse, is specifically included.
One type of controlling behaviour is economic abuse, which the Act goes on to define as any behaviour that has a substantial adverse effect on a person’s ability to acquire, use or maintain money or other property, or to obtain goods or services. This kind of behaviour is often used by one party to control the other.
And there is one other important point in the definition: behaviour may still be abusive towards the victim even if it is directed at someone other than the victim, for example the victim’s child.
Providing this definition of domestic abuse is one of the most important things that the Domestic Abuse Act 2021 did, but it did a number of other important things as well.
In the words of the Government, the Domestic Abuse Act 2021 set out to: “Raise awareness and understanding about the devastating impact of domestic abuse on victims and their families”, and to: “Further improve the effectiveness of the justice system in providing protection for victims of domestic abuse and bringing perpetrators to justice.”
The Act aimed to achieve its goals through various measures, including providing a statutory definition of domestic abuse, among others.
The first was the establishment of a Domestic Abuse Commissioner, “to provide public leadership on domestic abuse issues and play a key role in overseeing and monitoring the provision of domestic abuse services in England and Wales.”
The current Domestic Abuse Commissioner is Nicole Jacobs. An example of her actions was in the news recently when she warned the Government that domestic abuse services faced a “state of crisis” because of a lack of funding for councils and uncertainty over future resources.
The other measure was the introduction of a new civil Domestic Abuse Protection Notice (‘DAPN’) to provide immediate protection following a domestic abuse incident, and a new civil Domestic Abuse Protection Order (‘DAPO’) to provide longer-term protection for victims.
Police could issue a DAPN, mandating a perpetrator to leave the victim’s home, for instance, for up to 48 hours.
The police will also be able to apply to a court for a DAPO, as could a victim of abuse. The court can independently issue a DAPO during ongoing proceedings, not necessarily related to domestic abuse, at its discretion.
DAPOs can impose both prohibitions and positive requirements on perpetrators of abuse. These could include prohibiting the perpetrator from coming within a specified distance of the victim’s home and/or any other specified premises, such as the victim’s workplace, alongside requiring the perpetrator to attend a behaviour change programme, an alcohol or substance misuse programme or a mental health assessment.
Last year the Government announced that DAPNs and DAPOs would be piloted in Gwent, Greater Manchester, and three London boroughs (Croydon, Bromley and Sutton), with the Metropolitan Police, British Transport Police, and other criminal justice partners.
Family mediation is now an integral part of the family justice system in England and Wales. It resolves issues for separated couples outside of court, aiding thousands yearly.
But it wasn’t always this way.
Family mediation in this country is a relatively new phenomenon. It has its origins in the 1970s, although it did not really begin to take off until the early 1980s.
Initially, mediation lacked a standard model, training for mediators, or regulation.
Different organizations independently developed mediation practices, resulting in variations based on location and chosen organization.
There was also no single voice to speak for family mediation, and put its case to government and the media.
All of that changed in 2007 when the Family Mediation Council (commonly abbreviated to ‘FMC’) was established.
The FMC is currently made up of five family mediation organisations:
1. The College of Mediators, which was set up in 1996 and also covers non-family mediation;
2. The Law Society, which is the professional body for solicitors and offers Family Mediation Accreditation;
3. The Family Mediators Association, which was established in 1988 and now has a membership of around 350 family mediators;
4. National Family Mediation, which was established in 1982 and is the largest provider of family mediation in England and Wales; and
5. Resolution, the association of family lawyers, which also offers Family Mediation Accreditation.
The FMC is a not for profit organisation that maintains a professional register of family mediators.
The Family Mediation Council is dedicated to promoting best practice in family mediation, with the central aim of ensuring that the public can confidently access family mediation services that offer high quality mediation provided by mediators who meet the FMC’s standards.
The FMC does not itself provide mediation. Instead, it ensures that all FMC Registered Mediators are: trained to a set standard; follow the FMC’s Code of Practice (see below); hold relevant insurance; are required to carry out training and activities to ensure their continued professional development; receive the appropriate supervision and support; and are required to have a complaints process.
The FMC also provides the profession of family mediation as a whole, the members, mediation services and family mediators with one unified body to make representations to government and other national interests, and promotes family mediation to the media and others.
Central to the FMC is its Code of Practice, which all of its members must follow.
The Code outlines the aims, objectives and scope of family mediation, and also details the general principles of family mediation, as well as the training and standards which can be expected of all FMC mediators.
The general principles of mediation set out in the Code include that mediators must act impartially, and with integrity and fairness towards both participants; that mediators must not disclose information obtained in mediation to anyone else, save in limited circumstances, such as where it appears that a child has suffered significant harm; that the mediator must be alert to the likelihood of power imbalances existing between the participants; and that participation in mediation must be purely voluntary.
You can find the full Code of Practice here.
Our founder Ian Walker, who trained as a mediator in 1996, is accredited by the FMC. Ian has also served as a Trustee of the Family Mediators Association, one of the member organisations of the FMC.
If you are affected by any of the issues raised in this article, you may find our family mediation page useful.
On the 22nd of February the Office for National Statistics (‘ONS’) published its latest annual figures for divorce rate in England and Wales, for the year 2022.
The statistics showed that the number of divorces granted in England and Wales plummeted to the lowest number since 1971.
In 2022, there were 80,057 divorces granted in England and Wales. (There were 74,437 in 1971, which was when the divorce laws in England and Wales were liberalised, resulting in a significant subsequent increase in the number of divorces).
The 2022 divorce rates were a 29.5% decrease compared with 2021, when there were 113,505 divorces, although the ONS point out that the higher divorce rates in 2021 may partially reflect delays in the number and timing of divorces granted during 2020 because of disruption in family court activity during the COVID-19 pandemic.
In 2022, divorce rates were 6.7 for men and 6.6 for women per 1,000 married individuals. These are the lowest rates since 1971, when the rates for both men and women were 5.9 per 1,000 of the married population
So what is behind the plummeting divorce rate?
The first thing to point out is that it is not due to fewer people being married, despite the fact that in December the ONS published figures that showed that the proportion of people aged 16 or older in England and Wales who are married or in a civil partnership had fallen below 50% for the first time.
Whilst that is true, and whilst there are certainly more people who have never married, the same figures showed that the actual number of people in England and Wales who are married has remained about the same for the last twenty years.
Clearly, more married people are choosing not to divorce, or at least delaying getting divorced.
Some speculate that the cost of living crisis is causing many to delay divorce proceedings.
Indeed, even before the divorce rate figures were published the financial services business Legal & General published research indicating that financial pressures had delayed some 19% of divorces
The cost of living crisis exacerbates the serious economic consequences of divorce.
Higher interest rates, for example, will have made it more difficult for divorcing couples to purchase new homes.
Higher inflation makes sharing expenses in one household more appealing than maintaining two separate households for couples.
Indeed, we’ll ascertain the impact of the cost of living crisis if divorce rates increase when the economic situation improves.
There was, of course, a very important change in the divorce laws in England and Wales in 2022.
On the 6th of April 2022 a new system of no-fault divorce was introduced.
The ONS notes that the number of divorces in 2022 may be influenced by the introduction of a new system, including mandatory waiting periods.
Those changes meant that a divorce under the new system would take a minimum of six months, whereas it was possible that a divorce under the old system could have been completed in less than that.
Obviously, no new divorces under the new system could have been completed until October 2022, at the very earliest.
Setting aside reasons for the decline, early figures suggest concerns about a significant increase in divorces due to no-fault divorce may be unfounded.
Back in 2017, for example, the Coalition for Marriage warned that the introduction of no-fault divorce would trivialise marriage and “cause the loss of 10,000 marriages a year by making the divorce process an administrative formality”.
As mentioned above no-fault divorce was only introduced in April 2022 and we will clearly have to wait for the 2023 figures to give a fuller picture, but the 2022 figures obviously show no sign that no-fault divorce has led to an immediate increase in the number of divorces.
For more information about divorce and separation and how we can help, see this page.
A child arrangements order is an order setting out with whom a child will live and what contact a person, usually a parent, will have with the child.
Child arrangements orders are usually made because the parents are not able to sort out arrangements for their children between themselves, and need to have the court sort them out for them.
But sadly parents don’t always adhere to the terms of child arrangements orders.
There are various ways in which an order may be breached.
The order may say the child lives with one parent but the visiting parent refuses to return them.
Or perhaps one parent denies contact with the child, defying the contact order.
Or the breach may relate to a detail in the order, for example a parent with contact not returning the child to the other parent at the set time.
So how do you report a breach of a child arrangement order?
Before doing anything else you should try to discuss the matter with the other parent. There could be a valid reason, and you might solve it through agreement.
It may also be possible to resolve the matter by coming to an agreement through solicitors.
But obviously it is not always possible to resolve the matter by agreement. You can report a breach of a child arrangement order to court by applying to enforce the child arrangements order in such a case.
In the application you will explain how the order has been broken, and ask the court to enforce the order.
You can request compensation for financial losses incurred due to non-compliance, like travel expenses for missed visits.
Before it takes any action, the court will want to know why the order was not complied with. Reasons may exist, or the court may adjust the order to resolve issues.
Without valid reasons, the court can take steps to enforce compliance with the order.
If it is satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that a person has failed to comply with the order without reasonable excuse then the court may make an enforcement order, imposing on the person an unpaid work requirement, of between 40 and 200 hours.
The court may also order compensation to the applicant from the breaching party, as previously mentioned.
And in severe cases, the court can fine or imprison the individual breaching the order.
Another option where there have been persistent breaches of an order by the parent with whom the child lives, and where it is appropriate, is for the court to order that the child move to live with the other parent.
The above is only a very brief introduction to the subject of enforcing child arrangements orders.
If you believe that a child arrangements order has been breached then it is strongly recommended that you seek expert legal advice, at the earliest opportunity. We can provide you with that advice. For more information about child arrangements orders and how to get in touch with us, see this page.
