Edge Rewrite
// request.cf · coarse context

A page that knows where it met you.

Only coarse request metadata is shown. This demo does not display or persist visitor IP addresses.

Country
US
Cloudflare location
CMH
Connection
HTTP/2
Language
Not provided

Ray ID: a224c92c8909cf33

Jump to content

Talk:Legislative drafting error

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Add topic
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Latest comment: 1 year ago by Court seal in topic Non-molestation orders, UK

Non-molestation orders, UK

[edit]

   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)Reply