Protection from harassment PDF

Preview

Summary

Methods court use to protect Vs from harassment revision notes....

Description

WHAT: o

PROTEC TION FROM HARASS MENT:

Protection from Harassment Act 1997 provides protection to people who Vs of stalking/harassment and who are NOT protected as ‘associated persons’ defined under FLA 1996 (not being considered an associated person prevents them from applying for an occupation order/non-molestation order)

WHO IS AN ‘ASSOCIATED PERSON’ (FLA 1996): 

S62(3) – a person will be associated with the R if: a) They are or have been married, civil partners or cohabitants. Cohabitants is defined in S62(1) as ‘two people who are neither married to each other nor civil partners but live together as husband and wife / civil partners. Concept should be interpreted generously, borderline cases shouldn’t be excluded (G v F). b) They live/have lived in the same household. c) They are relatives. d) They have agreed to marry one another or enter a civil partnership e) They have had an intimate personal relationship of significant duration. f) They are both parents of and / or have PR of the same child; or g) They are parties to the same family proceedings.

NOT ASSOCIATED: o The FLA 1996 does not protect those who are work colleagues, neighbours, or those who have met socially but have not dated or had any form of relationship. o Tuppen v Microsoft Corporation Ltd (2000) - it was held that the PfHA 1997 was directed at the prevention of stalking, anti-social behaviour by neighbours, and racial harassment. o Those not protected by the FLA 1996 can report harassment to the police or can bring civil proceedings for an injunction or damages.

PROHIBITION OF HARASSMENT: S1 (1) Protection from Harassment Act 1997: a person must not pursue a course of conduct: (course of conduct = more than 1 account) a) Which amounts to harassment of another; and b) Which he knows or ought to know amount to harassment of the other. - S2: R ought to know that it amounts to harassment of another if a reasonable person in possession of the same info would think the course of conduct amounted to harassment of the other. Conduct – incs speech (S7(4)). Harassment – incs but not restricted to ‘alarming the person’ and ‘intent to cause the person distress or harm’ – S7(2) / (Johnson v Walton 1990). Example: o A lying about her rel with B to Bs parents and breaking into the house demonstrates n intent to cause alarm/distress.

WHEN DOES PROTECTION FROM HARASSMENT ACT 1997 NOT APPLY? There are some circumstances where the PfHA 1997 will not apply to a course of conduct, for example if a person can show that: 1) it was pursued for the purpose of preventing or detecting crime; 2) it was pursued under any enactment or rule of law or to comply with any condition or

requirement imposed by any person under any enactment; or 3) in the particular circumstances the pursuit of the course of conduct was reasonable.

S1A PfHA 1997: - states that a person must not pursue a course of conduct which involves: a) the harassment of two or more persons and which he knows or ought to know involves harassment to those persons and by which he intends to persuade any person (whether or not one of those mentioned earlier) not to do something that he is entitled or required to do or to do something that he is not under any obligation to do.

CIVIL REMEDY FOR HARASSMENT: - S3 PfHA 1997 - an actual or apprehended breach of s1 PfHA 1997 may be the subject of a claim in civil proceedings by the person who is or may be the victim of the course of conduct in question. SUCCESSFUL CLAIM REMEDY: 1) Damages - can be awarded for consequences of harassment and any financial loss resulting from the harassment. 2) Injunction - Court has to grant in free-standing proceedings in the county court or High Court and the terms of this injunction can be enforced by a warrant for the arrest of the defendant under s3(3) PfHA 1997. o Where the court has granted an injunction and without reasonable excuse the defendant does anything that he is prohibited from doing by the injunction, he is guilty of an offence under s3(6) PfHA 1997. o It is punished by contempt of court or by criminal proceedings, but not both. o A person found guilty of such an offence is liable for a fine or up to six months’ imprisonment.

CRIMINAL REMEDY FOR HARASSMENT: - If a person pursues a course of conduct in breach of s1(1) or 1A PfHA 1997 he is guilty of an offence under s2 PfHA 1997. - It is a summary offence, which means that it can only be tried in the magistrates’ court. - If convicted the defendant would be liable for a fine or up to six months’ imprisonment. NOTE: The PfHA 1997 was amended under the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012. It contains offences of stalking (under s2A) and stalking involving fear of violence and serious alarm or distress (s4A).

RESTRAINING ORDERS: - S5 allows a court to grant a restraining order.

The order may be made for the purpose of protecting the victim of the offence, or any other person mentioned in the order, from further conduct that: a) amounts to harassment; or b) will cause a fear of violence; c) or to prohibit the defendant from doing anything described in the order. Duration: -

The order may have effect for a specified period or until further order.

Section 5A PfHA 1997 (introduced into the PfHA 1997 by the Domestic Violence, Crime and Victims Act 2004) allows a court to make a restraining order even if the defendant is acquitted of an offence, if it considers it necessary to do so to protect a person from harassment by the defendant....