Non-Molestation Orders Under FLA 1996, Part IV Meaning of ‘molestation’ under the Act

C v C (Application for Non-Molestation Order) (1998) Following the divorce of H and W, W published articles in the national press in which she purported to give information concerning H’s relations with her and his three former wives. The articles were couched in very unflattering terms. H complained that W’s intention was to humiliate and embarrass him. He applied for a non-molestation order under s 42 so as to prevent W harassing him by publishing matter which might affect the determination of financial issues between H and W. W contended that the facts of the case did not justify the making of such an order.