Moved by
Lord Rosser
121: Clause 63, page 44, line 29, at end insert—
“31VA Direction to prohibit direct or indirect engagement: evidence of domestic abuse
(1) In family proceedings, where specified evidence is adduced that a person who is a party to the proceedings has been the victim of domestic abuse carried out by another party, the court may give a direction prohibiting the latter party from directly or indirectly engaging with the victim during proceedings, if the court deems any such engagement is causing significant distress to the victim.
(2) In this section—
“domestic abuse” has the meaning given by section 1 of the Domestic Abuse Act 2021;
“specified evidence” means evidence specified, or of a description specified, in regulations made by the Lord Chancellor.
(3) Regulations under subsection (2) may provide that any evidence which satisfies the court that domestic abuse, or domestic abuse of a specified description, has occurred is specified evidence for the purposes of this section.
(4) A direction under this section may be made by the court—
(a) on an application made by a party to the proceedings, or
(b) of its own motion.
(5) In determining whether the significant distress condition is met in the case of a party, the court must have regard to, among other things—
(a) any views expressed by the victim;
(b) any views expressed by the other party;
(c) any behaviour by the party in relation to the victim in respect of which the court is aware that a finding of fact has been made in the proceedings or in any other proceedings;
(d) any behaviour by the party at any stage of the proceedings, both generally and in relation to the victim;
(e) any behaviour by the victim at any stage of the proceedings, both generally and in relation to the party;
(f) any relationship (of whatever nature) between the victim and the party.
(6) If the court decides that there are no alternative measures to prevent engagement which causes distress, the court must—
(a) invite the party to the proceedings to arrange for a qualified legal representative to act for the party during the court proceedings, and
(b) require the party to the proceedings to notify the court, by the end of a period specified by the court, of whether a qualified legal representative is to act for the party for that purpose.
(7) Subsection (8) applies if, by the end of the period specified under subsection (6)(b), either—
(a) the party has notified the court that no qualified legal representative is to act for the party during the court proceedings, or
(b) no notification has been received by the court and it appears to the court that no qualified legal representative is to act for the party during the court proceedings.
(8) The court must consider whether it is necessary in the interests of justice for the party to be represented by a qualified legal representative appointed by the court to represent the interests of the party.
(9) If the court decides that it is, the court must appoint a qualified legal representative (chosen by the court) to represent the party.
(10) If the court appoints a qualified legal representative to represent one party, and the other party to proceedings is not represented, the court must consider whether it is necessary in the interests of justice for the other party also to be represented by a qualified legal representative to ensure a fair process.
(11) If the court decides that it is necessary to appoint representation under subsection (10), the court must choose and appoint a qualified legal representative to represent the other party.”
Member’s explanatory statement
These changes would give courts the discretion to prevent a perpetrator directly or indirectly engaging with a victim during family court proceedings, where such engagement is causing distress, and to appoint a legal representative to represent the perpetrator in court, if that is necessary to prevent distress to the victim.