From 12 January 2026, family courts will follow new guidance on how to handle applications for non-molestation orders.
The guidance has been issued by the President of the Family Division and replaces earlier directions from 2017 and 2023.
The new guidance is intended to bring greater consistency to how courts deal with these cases and to make sure orders are both protective and fair.
What is a non-molestation order?
A non-molestation order is a court order designed to protect an individual from physical or other abuse or harassment by a partner, former partner or family member. Its purpose is to provide immediate legal protection where there is a risk of harm.
The order can stop a person from contacting you directly or indirectly, coming near your home or workplace, or engaging in specific behaviour such as intimidation, threats, or harassment. The precise terms of the order will depend on the circumstances of the case and the protection required.
Applications for non-molestation orders are often applied for at times of crisis, when an individual may feel frightened, overwhelmed, and uncertain about what will happen next. The process is intended to offer swift protection in those situations.
Importantly, breaching a non-molestation order is a criminal offence, which means that if the order is breached, the police can intervene immediately, providing an added layer of enforcement and protection.
Applying without telling the other person first
In some cases applications for non-molestation orders can be made without informing the other person in advance.
This is known as a without notice application. It allows the court to act very quickly where there is an urgent and immediate risk to the applicant or a child.
The new guidance makes it clear that this type of application should be reserved only in exceptional situations.
Judges are now expected to pause and carefully consider whether immediate protection is required, or whether giving notice of the application would actually place the applicant or a child at risk of harm.
If a without notice order is made, the court must list another hearing within 28 days. This is known as a return hearing and gives the other person the opportunity to attend court and respond to the allegations and make representations before the court decides whether the order should continue.
Where the application is made on notice, meaning the other person is informed of the application from the outset, hearings should usually be listed within 21 days.
This is intended to ensure that cases are dealt with promptly, while allowing both parties a fair opportunity to be heard.
A broader understanding of abuse
The guidance reflects a more informed and realistic understanding of domestic abuse, recognising that it is not limited to incidents of physical violence.
Abuse can take many forms including controlling or coercive behaviour, emotional harm, psychological pressure and financial control.
Judges are encouraged to look beyond isolated incidents and consider how abusive dynamics may operate behind closed doors and over time.
This includes recognising patterns of behaviour that are designed to exert power, control, or fear, even where there has been no recent physical assault.
In some cases, informing the other person about an application can lead to increase the risk to the applicant.
The guidance acknowledges that notice can lead to pressure, intimidation or attempts to persuade or coerce the applicant to withdraw their request for protection.
This broader understanding is intended to ensure that the court’s approach reflects the lived realities of those experiencing abuse and provides appropriate, effective safeguards.
Speed and fairness
Any delays with non-molestation applications can leave individuals feeling exposed and unprotected.
The new guidance therefore stresses that applications being considered by a judge promptly, often on the same day they are issued, particularly where there is an urgent risk
Courts are discouraged from refusing or returning applications without hearing from the applicant unless there is a clear legal reason for doing so.
This is intended to ensure that those seeking protection are given a proper opportunity to explain their circumstances.
Where emergency orders are made, the follow-up hearing must be is listed within a short and defined timeframe.
This ensures that matters are not left unresolved, while also giving the other person a fair opportunity to attend court and respond before longer-term decisions are made.
Clear orders and the new response form
Another significant change in the guidance is the emphasis on clear wording. Non-molestation orders must now set out precisely what the respondent is prohibited from doing, using clear, simple, and specific language.
Vague or overly broad wording is discouraged, as it can lead to misunderstanding and make orders more difficult to enforce in practice.
Every order must include a clear end date and should avoid necessarily restricting arrangements relating to children or participation in court proceedings, unless such restrictions are required for safety.
The guidance also introduces a new response form known as FL435. This form allows the person against whom the order is made to inform the court in advance whether they agree to the order continuing, whether they oppose it or whether they wish to challenge it.
The intention of this new form is to help judges identity the key issues before the hearing and avoid/reduce unnecessary delay.
At the return hearing, the court consider whether the order can continue by agreement, without making findings about who is right or wrong.
However, where there are allegations of violence or serious risk, judges are advised not to rely solely on undertakings and to ensure that any order made is clear, enforceable, and capable of immediate action if breached.
Enforcement of non-molestation orders
The guidance also highlights the importance of making sure orders are properly served.
This usually means the order is personally served on the respondent so there is no doubt that the respondent is aware of the order and its terms.
In addition, the police must also be notified that a non-molestation order has been served. This enables them to respond swiftly and appropriately if the order is breached, providing immediate protection where it is needed.
Furthermore, the guidance further encourages courts to coordinate cases involving children where possible.
By aligning related cases, courts can reduce the need for repeated hearings and minimise unnecessary stress and disruption for families, particularly where safeguarding concerns are involved.
Anyone thinking about applying for a non-molestation order, or responding to one, should contact our family solicitors for early advice.
