Alwyn (Non molestation proceedings by a child) [2009] NIFam 22 (12 November 2009)

Alwyn (Non molestation proceedings by a child) [2009] NIFam 22 (12 November 2009)

Alwyn's application for an occupation order is dismissed as he does not qualify as an entitled or non-entitled applicant under the 1998 Order. The application for a non-molestation order is withdrawn with leave, as there was insufficient evidence of Alwyn's understanding and the proceedings should have been brought by Evan in the Family Proceedings Court. The High Court confirms that a parent can apply for a non-molestation order to protect a child even if not personally molested, and that the proper procedural route was not followed.

Citation
[2009] NIFam 22
Parties
Applicant (child): Alwyn; Next Friend (father): Evan; Respondent (mother): Cate
Jurisdiction
Northern Ireland
Judgment Date
12 November 2009
Procedural Posture
Family Law Non Molestation and Occupation Order Application / High Court Judgment on Jurisdictional and Procedural Issues
Outcome
Application for occupation order dismissed; leave granted to withdraw application for non-molestation order.
Legal Topics
Non Molestation Orders, Occupation Orders, Jurisdiction of Courts, Capacity of Child Litigants, Next Friend Procedure, Domestic Violence, Residence Orders
Family Law Child Protection Non Molestation Orders Occupation Orders Jurisdiction of Courts Capacity of Child Litigants Next Friend Procedure Domestic Violence +1 more

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 4 Authorities cited 19 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Alwyn

Applicant (child)

Evan

Next Friend (father)

Cate

Respondent (mother)

Procedural Posture

Family Law Non Molestation and Occupation Order Application / High Court Judgment on Jurisdictional and Procedural Issues

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a child can bring non-molestation proceedings against a parent in the High Court
  2. 2 Whether a parent can act as next friend in such proceedings
  3. 3 Whether an occupation order can be sought by a child

Ratio Decidendi

Alwyn's application for an occupation order is dismissed as he does not qualify as an entitled or non-entitled applicant under the 1998 Order. The application for a non-molestation order is withdrawn with leave, as there was insufficient evidence of Alwyn's understanding and the proceedings should have been brought by Evan in the Family Proceedings Court. The High Court confirms that a parent can apply for a non-molestation order to protect a child even if not personally molested, and that the proper procedural route was not followed.

Court Disposition

Application for occupation order dismissed; leave granted to withdraw application for non-molestation order.

Orders

  • Alwyn's application for an occupation order is dismissed.
  • Alwyn is granted leave to withdraw the application for a non-molestation order.