M v D (Family Law Act 1996 : Meaning of "Associated Person")

M v D (Family Law Act 1996 : Meaning of "Associated Person")

A step-nephew is not a 'relative' within the meaning of s.63(1) of the Family Law Act 1996 and therefore not an 'associated person' under s.62(3)(d). The statutory language and legislative history indicate Parliament intended to limit the definition to those relatives expressly listed, and the omission of step-nephews was deliberate. A purposive interpretation cannot override the clear statutory structure. The District Judge was correct to dismiss the application for want of jurisdiction.

Parties
Appellant: M; Respondent: D
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
21 May 2021
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment on Appeal From Dismissal of Non Molestation Order for Want of Jurisdiction
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Non Molestation Orders, Interpretation of 'associated Person', Definition of 'relative' Under Family Law Act 1996, Jurisdictional Requirements for Injunctive Relief
Family Law Non Molestation Orders Interpretation of 'associated Person' Definition of 'relative' Under Family Law Act 1996 Jurisdictional Requirements for Injunctive Relief

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 15 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

M

Appellant

D

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Judgment on Appeal From Dismissal of Non Molestation Order for Want of Jurisdiction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a 'step-nephew' is a 'relative' and thus an 'associated person' under s.62(3)(d) and s.63(1) of the Family Law Act 1996
  2. 2 Whether the term 'nephew...by marriage' includes a step-nephew for the purposes of the Act
  3. 3 Whether a purposive interpretation of the statute allows inclusion of step-nephews as associated persons

Ratio Decidendi

A step-nephew is not a 'relative' within the meaning of s.63(1) of the Family Law Act 1996 and therefore not an 'associated person' under s.62(3)(d). The statutory language and legislative history indicate Parliament intended to limit the definition to those relatives expressly listed, and the omission of step-nephews was deliberate. A purposive interpretation cannot override the clear statutory structure. The District Judge was correct to dismiss the application for want of jurisdiction.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Permission to appeal granted
  • Appeal dismissed