The Scottish Government

« Previous | Contents | Next »

Listen

An Evaluation of The Protection From Abuse (Scotland) Act 2001

CHAPTER FIVE: CIVIL CASES PROCESSED BY THE 4 SHERIFF COURTS IN THE 4 MONTH PERIOD AFTER THE PFA ACT

5.1 This chapter is divided into 2 related sections. In section A, we consider all the cases processed by the 4 sheriff courts in the 4 month period after the date when the new Act came into force. We compare the 4 courts across the same 11 baseline measures used to analyse the pre-Act court records:

1. biographical characteristics of defender and pursuer
2. nature and length of relationship between pursuer and defender
3. number of biological and 'other' children
4. number of craves per application
5. number of incidents reported in each application
6. number and types of applications sought
7. number of applications seeking power of arrest
8. number and types of applications granted
8. number and types of applications not granted
9. number and type of application granting power of arrest
10.number and type of application refusing power of arrest.

5.2 In section B, we consider the PFA Act in more detail by focusing specifically on the same 92 cases analysed in the previous section but from a different perspective: rather than analysing the cases in relation to the individual sheriff courts, we examine them as 2 distinct groups.

SECTION A: GENERAL CHARACTERISTICS OF SAMPLE

5.3 Table 5.1 below illustrates the breakdown of the sample across the 4 sheriff courts.

Table 5.1 Types of post-Act applications made in the 4 courts

5.4 Table 5.1 shows that, there were 92 applications lodged across the 4 sheriff courts. In the post Act period as in the pre Act period, Glasgow was the busiest sheriff court, processing 73% of the cases overall. Dumbarton court followed with 13% of all cases and Stonehaven and Stirling were least busy of the 4 sheriff courts between them processing a total of 15% of the cases. Glasgow sheriff court processed the highest numbers of cases in both categories. Of note is the fact that Stonehaven sheriff court did not use the powers of the new Act at all in the time period under scrutiny.

5.5 In any examination of those cases processed in the time period after the Act came into force, it is important to consider the ratio of PFA Act to non-PFA Act cases in order to establish any discernible patterns.

Table 5.2 Breakdown of pre and post-Act applications in the 4 courts

5.6 Table 5.2 shows that of the 92 cases processed, 66 (72%) were for non-PFA orders and 26 (28%) were for orders under the new legislation. Glasgow court did process the highest number of PFA cases. However when the ratio of PFA Act to non PFA Act cases is considered, in Dumbarton this was 67%: 33% whilst in Glasgow the ratio was 25%: 75%, indicating that Dumbarton processed the highest proportion of PFA Act cases in the 4 month period after the Act. Stirling sheriff court's ratio was the same as Glasgow's with over three-quarters of all requests being for non-PFA orders. No orders for PFA interdicts were lodged in Stonehaven court. It seems important to consider why Stonehaven court did not use the powers of the new Act in the research period. At this point all we can do is speculate: reasons might include, for example, lack of knowledge by solicitors about the Act, low rates of action in this particular area of the law.

Profile of pursuers and defenders

5.7 In this section we identify some of the basic characteristics of the pursers and defenders reported in the case files. As with the pre-Act cases reported in the last chapter, it is important to note the limited biographical information recorded in the court records: across the full sample of 123 cases, only the sex and race of the pursuer and defender was available. Some court records contained information relating to age and employment status but numbers were very small and are thus are not reported in this study.

Table 5.3 Overall profile of pursuers and defenders

5.8 Table 5.3 reveals that 91 (99%) of the pursuers were female and 91 (99%) defenders were male. In the one case where the pursuer was male , a divorce order was being sought on the ground of the 'unreasonable behaviour' of the female defender. In relation to race of both pursuers and defenders, 89 (97%) were White, 2 (2%) were Asian and 1 (1%) Black African.

5.9 In the following section we examine aspects of the relationships between pursuers and defenders.

Table 5.4 Relational profile of defenders and pursuers at time of application

5.10 Table 5.4 shows that across all of the applications, 86 (94%) of the pursuers had separated from the defender at the time of the application. Of the remaining 6 cases, 4 were married, one cohabiting and the other dating. Table 5.4 also reveals that across all courts, 68% of pursuers and defenders had been in a relationship of at least 5 years, with 34% being in relationship of at least 10 years. Only 18% of relationships were of less than 2 years duration. Notwithstanding the limited numbers of cases in some courts, the pattern was similar across Glasgow, Stonehaven and Stirling sheriff courts in that at least 67% of relationships were at least of 5 years duration. Dumbarton sheriff court was the exception, 40% of relationships being at least 5years.

5.11 There were no biological children in a fifth of the relationships and no 'other' ²⁶ children in over three-quarters of the sample. This pattern was consistent across all courts. Seventy-one percent of all couples had at least one biological child - a pattern similar to the pre court cases and 43% had at least 2 children. Relatedly, only in 21 (23%) cases were there 'other' children.

APPLICATIONS MADE TO THE COURTS FOR LEGAL PROTECTION

5.12 In the following section we examine aspects of the relationships between pursuers and defenders.

Table 5.5 Profile of post PFA Act applications across the 4 courts

5.13 Table 5.5 shows that of the 92 cases processed in the 4 month period following the date the PFA Act came into force, overall, a fairly even spread of cases were processed on a monthly basis, the mean number of cases per month being 23. Within individual courts some slight differences were discerned. For example, Stonehaven court processed no cases in the months of April and May. The monthly average for each court was Glasgow: 18, Stonehaven: 1.5, Dumbarton: 4 and Stirling: 1.75, these figures probably reflecting the differences in the populations served by each court.

5.14 In terms of the number of craves contained within each application, Table 5.5 shows that across all 4 courts, 89% of applications contained at least 3 craves and supporting evidence - similar to the pre-Act cases reported in the last chapter. There was only one application containing one crave reported in Glasgow sheriff court.

5.15 When the numbers of incidents of violence and abuse raised in the applications is considered, Table 5.5 shows that 43% of all applications had 1-2 incidents reported, (higher than in the pre-Act cases) and a further 40% had between 3-4 incidents reported. In the remaining 16 cases (18%), at least 5 incidents were reported. In relation to individual courts, Table 5.5 also shows that in Glasgow and Dumbarton sheriff courts, just under half (46% and 42% respectively) of all applications reported between 1-2 incidents, whilst this figure was lower in both Stonehaven and Stirling sheriff courts. The small sub-samples for the courts should be taken into consideration when interpreting these figures.

5.16 When the time span between incidents is examined, Table 5.5 shows that in 71% of cases the time span covered in the applications was under 6 months and this pattern was reflected in all 4 sheriff courts. Interestingly in the pre Act cases, the times span was longer and only 35% of the cases covered in the same time period. Reasons for this are varied, for example, solicitors may select which evidence to include within the initial writ, which may be dictated by proximity to the time of the application for civil protection or seriousness of the incidents. Additionally, decisions made may be dependent on what the women has told the solicitor, who may play a gate-keeping role in such cases, as discussed previously.

5.17 The Protection from Abuse (Scotland) Act 2001 came into force in February 2002. It is important to identify exactly when the first PFA interdicts were requested.

Table 5.6 Dates of Applications for PFA orders only across the sheriff courts

5.18 Table 5.6 reveals that no applications for orders under the PFA Act were made in February 2002, the month it came into force. That no PFA orders were received in February, may be related not only to the fact that the Act of Sederunt (Ordinary Causes Rules) Amendment Act 2002 came into force on 8 March 2002 but also that solicitors would have to familiarise themselves with the new statute, its powers and its intended users.

5.19 Only 3 of the 4 sheriff courts received requests for PFA orders - Glasgow, Dumbarton and Stirling. All three sheriff courts received their first applications in March. In Glasgow sheriff court, the numbers of applications increased in both April and May. It is also worth noting that the numbers of applications lodged in Glasgow sheriff court doubled from March to May, perhaps indicative of a pattern - which only future longitudinal research will discern. In Dumbarton sheriff court, only one application was lodged in April though 5 were lodged in May. Stirling sheriff court's only case was lodged in March.

Orders craved in the case files

5.20 In this section we consider the different types of orders 'craved' ²⁷ by pursuers both generally and in relation to the 4 courts. We also identify the frequency of requests for each of the orders.

Table 5.7 Nature and frequency of craves sought in the 4 courts

5.21 Table 5.7 shows that, across all 4 sheriff courts, the 92 applications contained a total of 301 requests for orders. Seventy-two percent of these came from Glasgow sheriff court with Stonehaven, Dumbarton and Stirling sheriff courts accounting for 7%, 13% and 8% respectively. Looking at the general pattern across the courts, expenses orders were the most commonly requested orders (22%), followed by NHOs (18%). Joint third were requests for common law interdicts and matrimonial interdicts (17%). The fourth most frequently requested order was the PFA interdict (12%).

5.22 When the individual courts are examined, however, a more nuanced pattern emerges. It was reported in the last chapter that Glasgow sheriff court of all of the 4 courts reported the highest levels of NHOs, pre-Act. In the post-Act cases, this continued to be the most frequently requested order (22%) followed jointly by common law interdicts and expenses orders (21%). PFA interdicts in Glasgow sheriff court accounted for 10% of all applications. Stonehaven sheriff court had no requests for PFA interdicts at all. The most frequently requested orders in this court were matrimonial interdicts (40%) followed by expenses orders (25%). In Dumbarton sheriff court, the most frequently requested orders were jointly for PFA interdicts and expenses orders (26%). Stirling sheriff court had a pattern similar to Stonehaven, matrimonial interdicts being the most frequently requested order (42%) followed by expenses orders (21%). Of note is the fact that in Stirling sheriff court, there were no requests for common law interdicts or NHOs. However, this court had the highest percentage of requests for divorce (17%).

5.23 Table 5.7 shows that 85 (28%) craves with a power of arrest were sought. However, there were some differences when the individual courts were considered: Glasgow sheriff court had the lowest reported rate with 23% whilst Stirling court had the highest reported rate of 55%. Stonehaven sheriff court had 8 (40%) requests for an interdict with a power of arrest and Dumbarton court had 14 (36%) such requests.

Disposals reported in the 4 courts.

5.24 Before considering the disposals in the 4 sheriff courts, we report firstly on the number of cases where interim interdicts were granted. Across the 92 applications, final outcomes were recorded in 80 of the cases. In the remaining 12 cases, the court records recorded interim interdicts as being the only award.

5.25 We turn now to consider the final outcomes of the applications reported in the 80 cases illustrating the numbers and types of orders granted and not granted. There were 134 disposals reported across the 80 cases. One hundred and eleven (83%) orders were granted and 23 (17%) were not granted. Table 5.8 below identifies the orders granted.

Table 5.8 Nature and frequency of orders granted in 4 courts

5.26 Table 5.8 shows that of the 111 orders granted ²⁸ in the specified time period, the most frequently granted order was the matrimonial interdict (34%) followed by a common law interdict (23%), followed jointly by NHOs and PFA orders (18%). Common law interdicts and NHOs were the 2 most frequently granted in the pre-Act cases.

5.27 The patterns across the 4 courts varied. Glasgow sheriff court's 3 most frequently granted orders were, matrimonial interdicts (31%), common law interdicts (27%) and NHOs (23%). In Stonehaven sheriff court, the only orders granted were common law interdicts (20%) and matrimonial interdicts (80%). Notably of all the courts, Dumbarton granted the highest proportion of PFA orders (47%), this being the most frequently granted order followed by the common law interdict (20%). In Stirling sheriff court, matrimonial interdicts were the most frequently granted orders (70%) followed by PFA interdicts (20%). Glasgow and Dumbarton were the only courts to grant NHOs (23% and 7% respectively). Similar to the pre-Act cases, the number of expenses and residence orders granted was small across all the courts between them constituting only 6% of all orders granted.

5.28 Table 5.8 also reveals that 58 (52%) of all orders granted included a power of arrest. Glasgow sheriff court had 38 (44%), Stonehaven sheriff court had 4 (80%), Dumbarton sheriff court had 10 (67%) and Stirling sheriff court had 9 (90%). Glasgow sheriff court had the highest number although Stirling sheriff court had the highest percentage. However again the small numbers in the courts must be taken into consideration when interpreting these figures.

5.29 Turning now to consider those order not granted, Table 5.9 shows the nature and number of orders refused across the 4 sheriff courts.

Table 5.9 Nature and frequency of order not granted in the 4 courts

5.30 Table 5.9 shows that across the 80 cases, a total of 23 orders were not granted across the 4 sheriff courts. Glasgow sheriff court had the highest number of orders not granted (13), followed by Dumbarton (7), Stonehaven (2) and Stirling (one). The equivalent percentages were just about proportional to the numbers of applications in each court. Common law interdicts were the most frequently refused order (35%) followed jointly by matrimonial interdicts, NHOs and PFA interdicts (22%). Very low numbers across each of the courts made it difficult to discern individual differences. Table 5.9 shows that of the 23 orders not granted, 10 (44%) included a power of arrest. Once again, numbers across the 4 sheriff courts are too small to discern any pattern.

5.31 When we look more closely at the 5 PFA orders not granted, these relate to 4 cases. In case one, a common law interdict and an NHO were granted; in case 2 which included 2 requests for a PFA order, all requests for orders were refused; in case 3, an NHO was granted and in case 4, a common law interdict was granted.

SECTION B: THE PFA ACT AND NON-PFA ACT CASES

5.32 In this section we consider the PFA Act in more detail by focusing specifically on the cases which included a request for a PFA interdict and those which did not include such a request but which were eligible to use the powers of the new Act. We are thus looking at the same 92 cases analysed in the previous section but from a different perspective: rather than analysing the cases in relation to the individual sheriff courts, we examine them as 2 distinct groups. Is it possible to discern any differences between these 2 groups of cases?

5.33 As discussed earlier, 92 court records were identified as being processed in the post PFA Act period under study (Feb-May 2002). Of these records, 26 individual cases included a request for a protection order under the new PFA Act. The remaining 66 cases, processed in the same time period, did not include any requests for such orders. We compare these 2 sets of cases across some of the same baseline measures used in the previous 2 chapters.

1. number of craves per application
2. number of incidents reported in each application
3. number and types of applications requested
4. number of applications seeking power of arrest
5. number and types of applications granted
6. number and types of applications granting power of arrest
7. number and types of application refusing power of arrest

5.34 Quantitative findings presented in this chapter will thus only focus on the 2 identified groups: individual sheriff courts will not feature in this analysis.

Applications for legal protection

5.35 In the following section we examine aspects of the applications for protection orders.

Table 5.10 Profile of PFA Act and non-PFA Act applications made after the Act

5.36 Table 5.10 shows that no PFA Act applications were made in February when the Act first came into force. The 22 applications made in February were for non-PFA orders. PFA applications were first made in March when 7 applications were sought. A further 6 were lodged in April with twice as many being lodged in May. The balance between the different orders varies as the months progress: in February and March there were more non-PFA Act requests than PFA Act requests and in April whilst there were more non-PFA applications, the proportion of PFA applications was greater than for the non-PFA applications. In May, the numbers of PFA applications overtook the number for non-PFA applications.

5.37 In relation to the number of incidents evidenced in the applications, Table 5.10 shows 83% of applications contained up to 4 incidents and this figure was consistent across the 2 types of cases. With regard to the time span of incidents, just under half (49%) overall occurred with 3 months and 72% within 3-6 months. In 68% of cases in the PFA Act group the time span covered by violent and abusive incidents was up to 6 months: in the non-PFA Act cases this was 74%. Differences were not significant.

Orders craved in the court records

5.38 In this section we consider the different types of orders 'craved' by pursuers both generally and in relation to the PFA Act cases and non-PFA Act cases. We also identify the frequency of requests for each of the orders. It is important to note that requests for PFA interdicts occurred alongside a variety of other requests, for example, for common law interdicts.

Table 5.11 Nature and frequency of craves sought in PFA Act and Non-PFA Act cases

5.39 Table 5.11 shows that across the 92 cases 301 requests for orders were sought. The most frequently requested order was the expenses order (22%). However this frequency can be explained in terms of the fact that a request for an expenses order would usually accompany any request for a legal protection order. It is therefore more accurate to regard the NHOs (18%) as the most commonly requested order followed by the common law interdicts (17%) and matrimonial interdicts (16%). PFA interdicts accounted for 12% of all requests for protection orders.

5.40 However when the PFA Act cases are compared with the non-PFA Act cases, a different picture emerges: in the PFA Act cases, predictably, the most frequent request was for a PFA interdict (44%) followed by an expenses order (27%) whilst in the non-PFA Act cases, matrimonial interdicts were most frequently requested (22%) followed by common-law interdicts (21%) and expenses orders (20%). When the 2 groups are considered further, we could hypothesise that requests for PFA interdicts have replaced requests for common law and matrimonial interdicts. However, further research would be needed to test this hypothesis further. The fact that no divorce orders were requested in the PFA group is doubtless due to the fact that they were not needed as the parties were, presumably not married. Non-harassment orders figure with equal percentages across the 2 groups (18%).

5.41 When requests for orders with a power of arrest are examined, 85 (28%) such orders were sought overall. The PFA Act cases contained 37 (44%) such requests. Of these, 95% were for PFA interdicts and 5% for matrimonial interdicts. Conversely in the non-PFA Act group, all 48 requests for orders with a power of arrest were for matrimonial interdicts.

Disposals recorded in the 4 sheriff courts.

5.42 Before considering the disposals reported in the 2 groups, we report firstly on the numbers of cases where interim interdicts were granted. In Chapter 4 we reported that across 92 applications for legal protection, final outcomes were recorded in 80 of the cases. In the remaining 12 cases, the court records recorded interim interdicts as being the only award. When we consider the 2 groups, 4 applications in the PFA Act group were granted interim interdicts and 8 applications in the non-PFA act group were granted interim interdicts.

5.43 We turn now to consider the final outcomes of the applications reported in the 80 cases illustrating the numbers and types of orders granted and not granted. There were 134 disposals reported across the 80 cases. One hundred and eleven (83%) orders were granted and 23 (17%) were not granted. Table 5.12 identifies the orders granted across the 2 groups.

Table 5.12 Nature and frequency of orders granted in PFA Act and non-PFA Act cases

5.44 Table 5.12 shows that matrimonial interdicts were the most frequently granted order (34%) followed by common law interdicts (23%). Joint third were NHOs and PFA interdicts (18%). It should be remembered, as discussed earlier, that whilst an application may contain requests for a number of protection orders, it may only be legally competent to grant one such order.

5.45 Some difference were discernible across the 2 groups: in the PFA Act cases, the most frequently granted order was the PFA interdict (67%) followed jointly by the common law and matrimonial interdicts (13%). Non-harassment orders (7%) featured minimally in these cases. With regard to the non-PFA Act cases, the most frequently granted order was the matrimonial interdict (42%) followed by common law interdicts (27%) and NHOs (22%), many more of the latter being in this group.

5.46 In relation to numbers of orders granting a power of arrest, Table 5.12 shows that 58 (52%) such orders were granted. The PFA Act cases had 24 (41%) of these cases with the remaining 34 (59%) cases in the non-PFA Act group.

5.47 Turning now to consider those order refused, Table 5.13 shows the nature and number of orders not granted across the 2 groups.

Table 5.13 Nature and frequency of orders not granted in PFA Act and non-PFA Act cases

5.48 Table 5.13 shows that across the 80 cases, a total of 23 orders were refused. Common law interdicts were most frequently not granted (35%), followed jointly by matrimonial interdicts, NHOs ²⁹ and PFA interdicts (22%). Within the PFA Act group most refusals were for PFA interdicts (50%) followed jointly by matrimonial interdicts and NHOs (22%). In the 'other' group, common law interdicts were most often refused (54%), followed jointly by matrimonial interdicts and NHOs (23%). There were 10 refusals for orders requesting a power of arrest. Seven of these were in the PFA Act group and 3 in the non-PFA Act group.

5.49 As noted earlier, in the 4 cases where 5 PFA orders were refused, orders, which were granted in these cases included 2 common law interdicts and 2 NHOs.

« Previous | Contents | Next »