Talk:Legislative drafting error

Non-molestation orders, UK

   1. Section 42(1) of the Family Law Act 1996 states:

      "In this Part a "non-molestation order" means an order containing either or both of the following provisions—

      (a) provision prohibiting a person ("the respondent") from molesting another person who is associated with the respondent;

      (b) provision prohibiting the respondent from molesting a relevant child."

      

   2. Office of the parliamentary counsel drafting guidance explains how the use of a conjunction may be avoided by making it clear in the opening words whether the paragraphs are cumulative or alternative.  In this case, after the word "containing", the sentence should continue from (a) or (b), and it should make sense.  But this does not make sense.

   3. It reads like this:  "In this Part a "non-molestation order" means an order containing provision prohibiting a person ("the respondent") from molesting another person who is associated with the respondent."

      Or like this:  "In this Part a "non-molestation order" means an order containing provision prohibiting the respondent from molesting a relevant child."

   4. "Non-molestation order" appears to have no meaning. Court seal (talk) 00:59, 30 September 2024 (UTC)