Advise Jayne on what steps she might take to get back into the family home with the
children and to protect themselves from Trina and her brother Darius.
Firstly, Jayne might apply for an occupational order that allows the Court to decide who can or
cannot exercise their living rights in the familial home.1 Therefore, if all the requirements are
met, the Court can exclude anyone from the house and its surroundings and enforce the
applicant’s right to return home. This enforcement might be relevant to Jayne as she was locked
out of the house when she shouldn’t have been.
Secondly, Jayne might apply for a non-molestation order to prevent Trina and Darius from
threatens and violence against herself and the children, or intimidating and harassing her, to
ensure her and the children well-being.2
Under the Act , to apply for an occupational and a non-molestation order, Jayne has to be
‘associated’ with the other person.3 Jayne is in a civil partnership with Trina for more than three
year; they lived in the same household and have children together. Also, Jayne is relative-in-law
with Darius and lived together in the same household for some time. Therefore, by definition,
Jayne is an associated person and is eligible to apply for occupational or a non-molestation order
against Trina and Darius. Also, a non-molestation order has no court fee but is time-limited.
However, Jayne can ask for an extension if she needs to continue with the protection.
Consecutively, Jayne must satisfy other requirements to get an occupation order. Within s33, a
person is entitled to occupy the property ‘by virtue of a beneficial estate or interest or contract or
by virtue of any enactment giving him the right to remain in occupation’.4 The person is also
1
Family Law Act 1996 , s 33
2
Family Law Act 1996 , s 42
3
Family Law Act 1996 , s 33 (1) (b) (i)
4
Family Law Act 1996 , s 33 (1) (a) (i)
1
children and to protect themselves from Trina and her brother Darius.
Firstly, Jayne might apply for an occupational order that allows the Court to decide who can or
cannot exercise their living rights in the familial home.1 Therefore, if all the requirements are
met, the Court can exclude anyone from the house and its surroundings and enforce the
applicant’s right to return home. This enforcement might be relevant to Jayne as she was locked
out of the house when she shouldn’t have been.
Secondly, Jayne might apply for a non-molestation order to prevent Trina and Darius from
threatens and violence against herself and the children, or intimidating and harassing her, to
ensure her and the children well-being.2
Under the Act , to apply for an occupational and a non-molestation order, Jayne has to be
‘associated’ with the other person.3 Jayne is in a civil partnership with Trina for more than three
year; they lived in the same household and have children together. Also, Jayne is relative-in-law
with Darius and lived together in the same household for some time. Therefore, by definition,
Jayne is an associated person and is eligible to apply for occupational or a non-molestation order
against Trina and Darius. Also, a non-molestation order has no court fee but is time-limited.
However, Jayne can ask for an extension if she needs to continue with the protection.
Consecutively, Jayne must satisfy other requirements to get an occupation order. Within s33, a
person is entitled to occupy the property ‘by virtue of a beneficial estate or interest or contract or
by virtue of any enactment giving him the right to remain in occupation’.4 The person is also
1
Family Law Act 1996 , s 33
2
Family Law Act 1996 , s 42
3
Family Law Act 1996 , s 33 (1) (b) (i)
4
Family Law Act 1996 , s 33 (1) (a) (i)
1
