🔴 Non-Molestation order or finding of fact, defending or in need of the protection of the family court in Bedford.

McKenzie friend advice, find a McKenzie friend, McKenzie friend Non Molestation order.

If you need advice, to contest or accept part of the allegation, then you need to call us ✅ for a free Initial Consultation. Low- cost support.

🔴-Conflict Complex Child Custody & None Molestation cases that need Expertise.

With over 30 years of successful experience in some of the most demanding cases
Highly Experienced Professional McKenzie Friend – Family Court Support

🔴Defending a Non-molestation order. In most cases, you should not accept a non-molestation due to false allegations 🔴 especially when the court or the opposing legal team offer undertaking, as this puts you in an unfair position.

🔴- I offer practical, affordable support for parents who can't afford expensive solicitor fees. If you're on a tight budget and need help, I'm here to support you.

I am regarded as one of the most knowledgeable and experienced McKenzie Friends in the UK, with over 30 years' experience. in more than 5,000 children's cases.

"I have maintained a strong record of success in highly complex cases, most notably securing a landmark Supreme Court ruling in 2012 known as the voice of the child " Judges' Comments as someone with life experience, and an Expert in his own right his knowledge to present a legal argument is isperational.

None Molestation cases and help before attending a hearing

✅ What you can do:

• 🔴 Go through the allegations with the person and help them understand each point.

• 🔴 Plan questions they want to ask the other party.

• 🔴 outline inconsistencies or gaps in statements/evidence.

• 🔴 their answers in a mock "cross-examination" style so they feel confident.

• 🔴 Organise their evidence to support their responses.

• 🔴 Court procedure and what the judge expects.

  matters of police disclosure and statements from witnesses

  Significant allegations of Rape will need dedicated time

  Allegations of child abuse and who this was reported to are significant also, the testing of evidence is vital to your success

🔴There is, therefore, a great deal of discretion afforded to the court in determining what constitutes molestation and, consequently, whether an application should succeed.

This should not be troublesome in a case involving clear acts or threats of violence. However, where the molestation complained of is more indirect in its effect on the applicant, success could prove more problematic. For example, if a respondent is handing out leaflets containing marital secrets, then there is a real question as to what extent this qualifies as molestation (C v C above). It would normally be argued as molestation in the form of harassment, but there is clearly potential for this to fail.

A good rule to bear in mind as part of the drafting is that the less actual violence or direct fettering with the applicant's person, there has been, the more detail will be needed to explain exactly why the order should be granted. The behaviour of the respondent should be clearly defined, causally linked to the applicant's reaction, which should, of course, be given as much detail as possible too.

🔴The importance of the affidavit in such a situation is that if one is making an application before the 'district judge of the day', as is likely, it will be almost impossible to enter into much by way of oral argument and persuasion. The hard work must be done before the hearing, with a suitably drafted affidavit that can address these potential concerns.

🔴Reasons for making the application ex parte
It is a requirement of rule 3.8 (5) of the FPR 1991 that a reason must be expressly stated for why the application is being made ex parte rather than inter partes. The language of the test set out at s.45 (2), FLA 1996 should be closely used when drafting this paragraph:

"In determining whether to exercise its powers under subsection (1), the court shall have regard to all the circumstances, including-
(a) any risk of significant harm to the applicant or a relevant child, attributable to the conduct of the respondent, if the order is not made immediately;
(b) whether the applicant will likely be deterred or prevented from pursuing the application if an order is not made immediately; and
(c) whether there is reason to believe that the respondent is aware of the proceedings but is deliberately evading service, and that the applicant or a relevant child will be seriously prejudiced by the delay involved-
(i) where the court is a magistrates' court, in effecting service of proceedings; or
(ii) in any other case, in effecting substituted service."

🔴 Therefore, if your application cannot be based upon significant harm, then it must be clearly stated that either the respondent is likely to evade service if aware of the proceedings, or more likely, that the applicant will be deterred from making the application if it is not done so immediately. The extent to which this is true will depend upon the applicant, but a clear reference must be made under at least one of these heads.

Terms of the non-molestation order
A further part of the affidavit that should be given due consideration in terms of the injunction being sort which can be dealt with in both the FL401 application form and in the body of the affidavit. The provisions of an injunction can be generally put or drafted specifically to cover any act of molestation. See FLA 1996, s 42(6):

"A non-molestation order may be expressed to refer to molestation in general, to particular acts of molestation, or to both".

Given the changes to the FLA 1996 made by the Domestic Violence and Criminal Victims Act 2004 ("DVCVA 2004"), it is to be actively encouraged for terms to be drafted in a specific form. This is largely to help with enforcement, and the fact that most non-molestation orders are now likely to be enforced in a criminal court, where the certainty provided by specific drafting could be crucial to a conviction. It is therefore to be encouraged for an injunction to contain provisions protecting chattels, dwellings (independent of occupation orders) and against the thousand different ways in which molestation may manifest.

Duration
🔴A non-molestation order may be made for a specified period or until a further order is made (FLA 1996, s 42(7)). The length of the order will largely depend upon the extent to which the terms of the order affect the respondent. If the order can be broken unwittingly by the respondent in the course of his day-to-day life then the court will be extremely keen to bring the order back to court as soon as possible. If the order only has an impact upon the respondent if he actively seeks to break it, then the court will be more minded to grant it for a longer, or indefinite, period of time.

Further information and details can be discussed, as this is a broad topic.

Occupation Orders
The two tests
There are two tests to which the court must have regard when deciding whether to grant an occupation order.

The first is known as the 'balance of harm test' because it requires the court to balance the harm caused to the applicant, respondent and any relevant children if the order were or were not to be made. If the applicant is entitled [2] to occupy the dwelling house [3] or a spouse or former spouse of the respondent and there would be a risk of the applicant or relevant child suffering significant harm, attributable to the respondent, if the order was not made, greater than any harm caused to the respondent or relevant child if the order were made then the court have a duty to grant the order (FLA 1996, s 33(7), s 37(4)). If the applicant is not entitled to occupy the property and a cohabitant or a former cohabitant, then the court must simply 'have regard' to the balance of harm test (s 36(7)(b); s 38(4)(e)). If the applicant is associated in some other way with the respondent and not entitled to occupy the property, then they are unable to make an application for an occupation order.

The second test is usually referred to as the 'core criteria', which the court may have regard to at any time when granting an occupation order, even if they have found against the applicant on the balance of harm test. The content of the core criteria depends upon the applicant's entitlement to occupy the property and their relationship with the respondent. If the applicant is entitled to occupy the property, then the core criteria are (S 33(6))[4] :

(a) the housing needs and housing resources of each of the parties and of any relevant child;
(b) the financial resources of each of the parties;
(c) the likely effect of any order, or of any decision by the court not to exercise its powers under subsection (3), on the health, safety or well-being of the parties and of any relevant child; and
(d) the conduct of the parties in relation to each other and otherwise.

If the applicant is not entitled but a spouse or former spouse of the respondent then the court may have regard to some additional factors, including the length of time since the parties lived together, the length of time since the marriage was formally ended and any ongoing ancillary relief applications or disputes as to the ownership of the property (s 35(6)). If the applicant is not entitled but a cohabitant or former cohabitant of the respondent then the court may also have regard to the nature and length of the parties' relationship, whether there are or have been any relevant children, the length of time since the parties' relationship came to an end and whether there are any ongoing Schedule 1, Children Act 1989 maintenance applications (36(6)).

Application of the two tests to the affidavit
In an ex-parte hearing most tribunals will be extremely unlikely to hear legal argument and they will refuse to remove a respondent from a property in which they live, irrespective of the facts of the situation (see B. James, "Controlled Abuse" [2007] NLJ 157 at 930) This means that there will be certain situations where it may seem as though there is little point in dwelling upon the tests in the affidavit. I would suggest that, if there is time, the applicant's best case should always be made out; at the very least, it will assist both the applicant and the advocate at the return hearing.

If the respondent is not in occupation of the relevant property, it should be clearly stated; if this is not included, as explained above, the court is unlikely to grant the occupation order without amendment. If the respondent is living elsewhere, it also makes sense to give as much detail as possible about their current housing provision. As one will note from both the core criteria and the balance of harm test, the suitability of the respondent's current accommodation will be decisive in whether an order is granted. Furthermore, it could have a direct impact on the duration of the order and the urgency with which the court will seek an early return date.

🔴The core criteria in favour of the applicant should be made out clearly in the affidavit; these can be stated factually without the need for legal argument. The extent to which the factors under the core criteria in the applicant's favour should be contrasted with the converse criteria of the respondent is simply a matter for the author, bearing in mind that it is an ex parte hearing and the court will undoubtedly give little weight to any words that the applicant purports to put into the mouth of the respondent.

Terms of the occupation order
The most important distinction to bear in mind in respect of the terms of an occupation order is between declaratory and regulatory orders: the former creates an entitlement for the applicant to occupy the property, the latter regulates the occupation of the dwelling home.

If the applicant is not entitled to occupy the property, it is absolutely crucial to remember to seek a declaratory order under FLA 1996, s 35(4) or s 36(4). If this is not sought, then whatever regulation of the dwelling home is irrelevant because the applicant will have no right to enter the property and remain inside. A declaratory order cannot be sought if neither party is entitled to occupy the property.

In respect of regulating the occupation of the dwelling home, it is possible to exclude the respondent from the whole of the property or just a part of it (s 33(3), 35(5), 36(5), 37(3) and 38(3). If one seeks to secure a zone of safety around a particular part of the property, this will depend upon the court being persuaded that it is logistically possible to do so. If such an order is sought, the affidavit should set out clearly how this is possible, with, time providing, a floor plan of the property exhibited.

🔴 Duration aspects
The duration of an occupation order will, like the non-molestation order, largely depend upon the extent to which it fetters the respondent (see above). It is worth highlighting, however, that there are strict rules in occupation orders relevant to the maximum periods of time which an occupation order can be granted, depending upon the applicant's entitlement to occupy the property and their relationship with the respondent. If the applicant is entitled to occupy the property, then the order may be made for a specified period of time, until the occurrence of a specified event or further order (FLA 1996, s 33(10). If the applicant is not entitled but a spouse or former spouse of the respondent, then the order can only be made for 6 months, which can be extended in 6-month periods upon application (s 35(10); s 37(5)). If the applicant is a cohabitant with no entitlement to occupy, then the order may, again, only be for 6 months but may be extended only once (s 36(10); s 38(6)).

🔴 Serious Crime Act 2015 section 76🔴

Controlling or coercive behaviour in an intimate or family relationship

Under 3.1 Section 76 of the Serious Crime Act 2015 - Controlling or Coercive Behaviour in an Intimate or Family Relationship. Section 76 of the Serious Crime Act 2015 created a new offence of controlling or coercive behaviour in an intimate or family relationship. Prior to the introduction of this offence, case law indicated the difficulty in proving a pattern of behaviour amounting to harassment within an intimate relationship (the Statutory Guidance cites the following cases - Curtis [2010] EWCA Crim 123 and Widdows [2011] EWCA Crim 1500).

The new offence, which does not have retrospective effect, came into force on 29 December 2015.

An offence is committed by A if:

• A repeatedly or continuously engages in behaviour towards another person, B that is controlling or coercive; and
• At the time of the behaviour, A and B are personally connected; and
• The behaviour has a serious effect on B; and
• A knows or ought to know that the behaviour will have a serious effect on B.

A and B are 'personally connected' if:

• they are in an intimate personal relationship; or
• they live together and are either members of the same family, or
• They live together and have previously been in an intimate personal relationship with each other.

• case of Re L (Contact: Non-Molestation Order) [2002] 1 FLR 1004 discusses how non-molestation orders can impact contact arrangements, particularly when no findings of fact have been made.

  Another relevant case is Re A (Contact: Domestic Violence) [2000] 1 FLR 347, which explores how allegations of domestic violence can influence the court's decisions on contact, even in the absence of definitive findings. These cases help illustrate how courts balance safety concerns and the child's welfare in these contexts.
  

  Applications for non-molestation orders need not be restricted solely to acts of violence and are extended to all acts of 'molestation'. There is no statutory definition of what molestation includes so you must look to case law for guidance (C v C [1998] 1 FLR 554; Walton v Johnson [1990] 1 FLR 350) Also helpful is s. 42 (5) FLA 1996 which states that the court will have regard to all the circumstances that go toward securing the health, safety and well-being of the applicant, relevant child or any other person that the order is being sought to protect.

Non‑Molestation Orders & McKenzie Friend Support

What is a Non‑Molestation Order?

A non‑molestation order is a court order designed to protect someone and/or their children from harassment, threats, intimidation, or violence by a partner, ex‑partner, or family member. It can forbid contact, coming near your home or workplace, or asking others to contact you on their behalf. The order aims to create safety and clear boundaries while longer‑term arrangements are sorted out. It is a civil order, but breaching it is a criminal offence. Both survivors of abuse and people who feel wrongly accused may be involved in these applications.

Typical Grounds for Applying

Applications are usually based on a pattern of behaviour rather than a single incident. This can include:

• Physical or sexual violence, or threats of violence
• Controlling or coercive behaviour, including financial control
• Stalking, monitoring, or repeated unwanted contact
• Emotional or psychological abuse, including threats to take children
• Harassment through messages, social media, or third parties

The court looks at the overall impact on your safety, wellbeing, and any children involved. If you are responding to an application, you may feel the allegations are exaggerated or untrue. A McKenzie Friend can help you explain your side clearly and respectfully.

The Application Form & Your Statement

The main documents are the application form and your supporting statement. The statement is your chance to tell the court what has happened, how it has affected you or the children, and what protection or changes you need. It should be honest, specific, and as clear as possible, using dates, examples, and describing how you felt and what you did afterwards. If you are the respondent, your statement explains what you agree with, what you dispute, and any evidence you have. The court is not judging you as a person, but trying to understand the situation and risks.

How a McKenzie Friend Can Help at This Stage

• Clarifying your goals: Talking through what protection or changes you realistically need, or what parts of the order you can or cannot accept.
• Drafting and structuring your statement: Helping you put events in order, use clear language, and avoid emotional outbursts that may distract from your key points.
• Checking for gaps or contradictions: Gently spotting where more detail, dates, or explanation might be needed.
• Preparing supporting documents: Organising messages, emails, photos, or reports into a simple, labelled bundle.

Organising a Chronology of Events

A clear chronology (timeline) is one of the most useful tools in a non‑molestation case. It helps the judge see how events developed over time and how serious or persistent the behaviour has been. For respondents, it can show your version of events, highlight inconsistencies, or demonstrate steps you took to reduce conflict. A good chronology is factual, dated, and avoids unnecessary detail.

Practical Tips for Your Chronology

• List key events in date order, with short, neutral descriptions.
• Include where it happened, who was present, and any follow‑up (e.g. police call, GP visit).
• Cross‑reference to evidence (for example, “see WhatsApp screenshot 3”).
• Keep it to the most important events rather than every disagreement.

How a McKenzie Friend Assists

• Helping you remember and order events calmly, without pressure.
• Turning scattered notes and messages into a clear, typed timeline.
• Ensuring your chronology matches your statement and documents.
• Highlighting patterns the court may find important, such as escalation or attempts to seek help.

Without‑Notice (Ex Parte) Hearings

Sometimes the court hears an application without the other person being told in advance. This is called a without‑notice or ex parte hearing. It is usually used where there is an urgent risk of harm or where giving notice might increase the danger. Only the applicant attends. The judge decides whether to make a temporary order until a full “return” hearing, where both sides can be heard.

Support from a McKenzie Friend at a Without‑Notice Hearing

• Before the hearing: Helping you focus on the most urgent risks, prepare a short list of key points, and organise your papers so you can find them quickly.
• In court: Sitting beside you for quiet reassurance, helping you stay calm, and reminding you of your main points if you lose track.
• After the hearing: Going through the order with you, explaining what it means in everyday language, and helping you plan what to do next.

Return Hearings (Both Sides Present)

A return hearing is when both the applicant and respondent attend court so the judge can hear from each side. The judge may keep, change, or discharge the order, or list the case for a longer hearing with evidence. Emotions can be very high at this stage, especially where there are children or serious allegations. The court expects everyone to behave respectfully and focus on the issues, not personal attacks.

How a McKenzie Friend Helps at the Return Hearing

• Understanding the paperwork: Explaining the application, statements, and any directions in plain language so you know what the judge will be looking at.
• Preparing your position: Helping you write a short summary of what you want the court to do and why.
• Organising your evidence: Making sure your bundle is in order, with tabs or page numbers, so you can quickly show the judge relevant documents.
• Emotional support: Sitting beside you, offering calm reassurance, and helping you stay focused if you feel overwhelmed or triggered.
• Quiet guidance: Suggesting questions or points to raise, in writing or whispers, while respecting the court’s rules that they cannot speak on your behalf.

What Happens if a Non‑Molestation Order is Breached?

Breaching a non‑molestation order is a criminal offence. If the person protected by the order believes it has been breached, they can contact the police, who may arrest the other party. The court can impose penalties ranging from a warning or fine to imprisonment, depending on the seriousness and pattern of breaches. If you are protected by the order, you are not in trouble for being contacted, but the court may look at how you responded. If you are accused of breaching an order, it is important to take it seriously and seek legal advice where possible.

McKenzie Friend Support Around Alleged Breaches

• For protected persons: Helping you record incidents, keep copies of messages, and prepare a clear account for the police or court.
• For respondents: Assisting you to gather evidence of what actually happened, such as call logs, messages, or witnesses, and to explain any misunderstandings.
• Preparing for hearings: Supporting you to organise your documents, understand the allegations, and present your side calmly and respectfully.

Staying Calm and Looking After Yourself

Whether you are seeking protection or defending yourself against allegations, non‑molestation proceedings can be frightening and exhausting. It is normal to feel anxious, ashamed, angry, or confused. A compassionate McKenzie Friend offers practical help and a steady presence, without judging your past or taking sides in your personal life. They can remind you to take breaks, breathe, and focus on what the court needs to decide today, rather than every hurt from the relationship. You do not have to go through the process alone, and asking for support is a sign of strength, not weakness.

Understanding Finding of Fact Hearings & McKenzie Friend Support

A finding of fact hearing is a court hearing where a judge decides whether specific allegations, such as domestic abuse or harmful behaviour, did or did not happen. In children cases, the court focuses on which facts it must decide in order to make safe, fair arrangements that protect the welfare of the children. The judge will not investigate every dispute, only those allegations that are serious, relevant, and clearly set out in advance.

The court usually uses a Scott Schedule to decide which allegations to consider. This is a table listing each allegation, the date or period, what is said to have happened, and the other party’s response. A McKenzie Friend can help you draft a clear, focused Scott Schedule that avoids unnecessary detail, groups similar incidents, and highlights patterns of behaviour that matter for child safety and future contact arrangements.

Evidence is crucial. The court expects you to support allegations with documents, messages, photographs, medical or police records, and witness statements where available. A McKenzie Friend can help you organise exhibits into a logical bundle, label them clearly, and cross‑reference them in your Scott Schedule and statement. They can also assist you in drafting a concise narrative of events that explains the background, key incidents, and impact on you and the children, without becoming overwhelming or argumentative.

Witness statements allow you and any witnesses to tell your story in an organised way. A McKenzie Friend can help you structure your statement chronologically, stick to facts, and link each important event to evidence. They can also help you prepare questions for the other party and witnesses, focusing on clarifying inconsistencies, testing credibility, and drawing out information that helps the judge understand risk, patterns of control, and the children’s experiences.

Cross‑examination can feel intimidating, especially where there are allegations of domestic abuse. The court must consider special measures, and in many cases an alleged abuser will not be allowed to question the alleged victim directly. A McKenzie Friend cannot speak for you, but they can help you plan your questions in advance, keep them short and focused, and avoid emotional arguments. They can also help you practise how to answer questions calmly and clearly, staying grounded in the facts and your evidence.

At the end of the hearing, the judge will weigh all the evidence, consider the consistency and reliability of each account, and decide which allegations are proven on the balance of probabilities. The judge’s findings then guide future decisions about child arrangements and protective orders. A McKenzie Friend can help you understand the judge’s reasoning, identify the practical implications of the findings, and prepare for the next steps in your case, such as welfare reports or further hearings.

Managing stress is essential throughout this process. A McKenzie Friend can support you by breaking tasks into manageable steps, helping you prepare checklists for the hearing day, and encouraging you to focus on what you can control: your evidence, your preparation, and your behaviour in court. They can remind you to take breaks, use breathing techniques, and seek emotional support from trusted friends or professionals when needed.

Above all, the court’s primary concern is the welfare of any children involved. Keeping this at the centre of your decisions can help you stay focused when emotions run high. A McKenzie Friend can gently redirect you to child‑focused language, help you show the court how your proposals promote safety and stability, and support you in presenting your case in a calm, organised, and respectful way that helps the judge make the best possible decisions for your children.