# Occupation orders under the Family Law Act 1996

> **Key takeaway:** FLA 1996 occupation orders ss.33–38 by status. Balance of harm + circumstances. May exclude from home/area. Often paired with NMO. Procedure FPR Part 10. Crisis: call emergency services / DA support (see signpost note).

- **Jurisdiction:** England & Wales
- **Practice area:** Family
- **Last reviewed:** 2026-08-04
- **Interactive page:** https://kttclegal.info/library/notes/Family/occupation-orders-overview
- **Keywords:** occupation order, Family Law Act 1996, section 33, balance of harm, exclusion order, family home, non-molestation, domestic abuse civil remedies

## What is this about?

Occupation orders regulate who may live in a family home and can exclude a party from the dwelling or a defined area. They are civil family remedies under the Family Law Act 1996, often sought alongside non-molestation orders. This is practitioner reference material on the statutory tests — not crisis advice for someone in immediate danger (see the non-molestation signpost note for support routes).

## What is the core rule?

Under FLA 1996 ss.33–38, the court may make occupation orders depending on the applicant's property/home rights status (entitled applicant under s.33; other gateways for cohabitants/former spouses with different balances of harm tests). The court considers all the circumstances including housing needs, resources, and conduct, and applies the balance of harm test where the statute requires it (significant harm risk comparison). Orders may include exclusion zones and temporary occupation rights. Breach of certain occupation order provisions can be a criminal offence if a power of arrest is attached or under later enforcement frameworks — check current enforcement provisions.

## What are the elements or test?

1. Applicant's status: entitled under s.33 or other section gateway?
2. Property: dwelling-house and association eligibility
3. Balance of harm / discretionary factors under the applicable section
4. Duration and geographical scope of order
5. Linked non-molestation application?
6. Power of arrest / enforcement method

## Which authorities matter?

- **Family Law Act 1996, ss.33–41 (occupation orders and related provisions)** — Primary statutory scheme — section choice depends on the parties' property rights relationship.
- **Chalmers v Johns [1999] 1 FLR 392** — Court of Appeal guidance emphasising careful use of draconian exclusion and the statutory tests.
- **Family Procedure Rules 2010, Part 10 and related practice directions** — Procedure for applications under FLA 1996.

## How does this apply in practice?

Without-notice applications need careful justification. Always consider safeguarding and parallel children proceedings (PD12J). For someone in immediate danger, emergency services and specialist domestic-abuse support are the priority — see non-molestation signpost entry.

## What are common pitfalls?

- Using the wrong FLA section for the applicant's property status
- Under-evidencing balance of harm
- Seeking indefinite exclusion without statutory basis for duration
- Ignoring children arrangements interaction

## When would a practitioner use this?

Drafting FLA applications; advising on prospects of exclusion; linking with NMO strategy.

## Quick reference

FLA 1996 occupation orders ss.33–38 by status. Balance of harm + circumstances. May exclude from home/area. Often paired with NMO. Procedure FPR Part 10. Crisis: call emergency services / DA support (see signpost note).

---

*Reference material from [KTTC Legal](https://kttclegal.info/), not legal advice. Work product supports instructing solicitors and barristers under their supervision. England & Wales.*