Order

Gap #593

The assumption

If the other parent reports a new allegation at a different police station, a magistrate can immediately overrule the family court's contact order.

The reality

Reporting an allegation to the police, at any station, does not change a child arrangements order. The order stays in force until the family court varies or discharges it on an application under the Children Act 1989. When contact stops after a new allegation, it is usually because one of these separate steps has been taken. Bail conditions. Where someone is arrested, bail can carry conditions, and those can restrict contact with a child. In Nottinghamshire County Council v The Mother (Police Bail) [2024] EWHC 666 (Fam), which was a care case, police bail conditions prevented unsupervised contact with any child and left no room for the family court to allow it. Mrs Justice Lieven said it is not for the family court to dictate bail conditions to the police, but that the family judge was much better placed than the police to assess the risk to the child, and that she hoped the police would consider the role of the family court when setting bail conditions. The judgment records that an application to vary police bail conditions can be made to the magistrates' court. A Domestic Abuse Protection Order. The police can apply for a DAPO by complaint to a magistrates' court (section 28 of the Domestic Abuse Act 2021). Practice Direction 36ZG notes that, under section 36(1), the requirements of a DAPO must so far as practicable avoid conflict with any other court order or injunction the person is subject to, as well as conflict with their religious beliefs and interference with their work or with their attendance at an educational establishment. An application to vary or discharge a DAPO goes to the court that made it. A new family court order. A parent can apply to the family court to vary the child arrangements order, or for a protective order such as a non-molestation order. The police do not pass a new allegation to the family court automatically. Under the Disclosure of Information between Family and Criminal Agencies and Jurisdictions: 2024 Protocol, which replaced the 2013 Protocol and the old Annex H order template, police material is requested using the protocol's own forms. In private law proceedings the request goes to the police on the Annex 1 form, accompanied by an order in the court's standard form at Annex 5. The protocol states that use of its annexed forms is mandatory, and Annex 2 is the guidance written for completing Annex 1 in private law proceedings. Requests are expected to be focused and proportionate rather than a blanket trawl, and the guidance contemplates a 20-day timescale for the police response. In practice the court usually directs this where a fact-finding hearing is contemplated; where no direction has been made, the litigant in person has to ask the court to make the order. The DAPO rules send information the other way: when a family court makes a DAPO, the court officer emails a copy to the police within one day (Practice Direction 36ZG, paragraph 20). This part of the law is in transition. DAPOs have run in pilot areas only since 27 November 2024. The pilot ends on 24 November 2026, and from 25 November 2026 DAPOs are due to be available across all court jurisdictions in England and Wales, with Practice Direction 36ZG amended rather than replaced. Check the current position before relying on this after that date. Each of these is changed in a different place, so it matters which one has actually been made. This is general information, not legal advice.

Gap #999

The assumption

Domestic Abuse Protection Orders are only available in a few pilot areas, so a non-molestation order is the only option for most people.

The reality

Section 27 of the Domestic Abuse Act 2021 is in force only in pilot areas, for periods that end on 24 November 2026. The Family Procedure Rule Committee's July 2026 minutes record that Ministers decided the pilot concludes on 24 November 2026 and that DAPOs roll out across all court jurisdictions in England and Wales from 25 November 2026. The Ministry of Justice's Family Procedure Rules page records that Practice Direction 36ZG is amended from 25 November 2026 to reflect DAPOs being extended to all of England and Wales, on a piloted basis and for specified purposes. As at 12 November 2026 the regulations that bring that into force were not visible on legislation.gov.uk, so the start date is not confirmed from legislation. A DAPO is not a non-molestation order under a new name. The difference is in what each order is allowed to contain. A non-molestation order under section 42 of the Family Law Act 1989 is prohibitory. It restrains a person from molesting another, and that can cover violence, intimidation, harassment, pestering, contact, or coming within a specified distance, and it can protect a child as well as the person who applied. What it cannot do is order the person to do something positive, such as attend a course or go to appointments. A DAPO is drafted to allow that. Section 35(1) of the Domestic Abuse Act 2021 lets the court impose "any requirements that the court considers necessary to protect" the person, and provides that a requirement "includes any prohibition or restriction". The examples in section 35(4) and (5) are prohibitions, but section 35(3) says those examples do not limit the type of provision that can be made, so in principle a DAPO can also carry positive requirements. Section 35(6) allows an electronic monitoring requirement, subject to the conditions in section 37: the court must have been notified by the Secretary of State that monitoring arrangements are available in the relevant area, the requirement cannot be imposed in the person's absence, and any third party whose co-operation is needed must consent. The Act does not create a "supervisor" role; the only person it names is the responsible person who monitors an electronic tag (section 37(6)). The practical limit matters more than the design at the moment. The minutes also record that positive requirements and electronic monitoring will not be available in the family or civil courts at launch, that DAPOs protect victims aged 16 and over, and that non-molestation orders remain available and are expected to be used in most cases. So a DAPO made in the family court from 25 November 2026 is likely, in practice, to look much closer to a non-molestation order than the breadth of section 35 suggests. Check the current position with the court or a domestic abuse support service before relying on a date. This is general information, not legal advice.

Gap #591

The assumption

If I move out and keep paying what I pay now, that is an agreed arrangement we can both rely on.

The reality

Without a court order, a pattern of payments between spouses is informal. Either person can change it, and it does not bind the other (see gaps 75 and 549). Financial claims between spouses stay open until a court order deals with them, however long the separation lasts (see gaps 425 and 559). Someone who needs temporary support during the divorce can apply to the court for maintenance pending the outcome of the proceedings, but the outcome is not guaranteed (see gap 41). Texts and emails about money after separation can have legal consequences (see gap 256).

Gap #590

The assumption

If I move out of the family home, I lose my say in the children's lives, or an arrangement has to be formally agreed before I go.

The reality

Parental responsibility does not end because a parent moves out (see gaps 55 and 57). Without a child arrangements order, nothing automatically fixes where the children live or how time is shared once one parent leaves. Arrangements can be agreed informally, but an informal agreement is not binding (see gap 561). If the matter does reach court, the welfare checklist in section 1(3) of the Children Act 1989 includes the likely effect on the child of any change in circumstances. The pattern the children become used to, including time with each parent after the move, can form part of that picture. Money is separate. Child maintenance and any financial order are not decided by who moved out (see gap 519).