National Centre for Domestic Violence Logo

Please note that Internet Explorer is no longer a supported browser so we cannot guarantee the integrity of our website when using it. Please use an alternate browser like Edge or Chrome.

Access ASSIST Online Injunction Database

Click here to leave training feedback

-or-

Make a Referral Using the Form Below:









    YesNo


    YesNo
    *Fields required. By submitting a referral you agree to receive updates on the progress of your referral, as outlined in our Privacy Policy.

    Domestic Abuse Protection Orders (DAPOs)

    Domestic Abuse Protection Orders (DAPOs) 1

    What is a Domestic Abuse Protection Order?

    A Domestic Abuse Protective Order (DAPO) is currently being piloted in certain areas of England and Wales. It is a protective order for those experiencing domestic abuse. It prohibits the abuser from doing certain things for a period of time such as communicating with and contacting the victim, harassing, threatening and approaching them, posting things on social media, etc. DAPO’s are the first protective orders that are available through both Civil and Criminal Court proceedings.

    How did the DAPO come about?

    The Domestic Abuse Act of 2021 was put in place by government to move towards a society that has zero tolerance towards domestic abuse and provide those experiencing it with the support and service they deserve. There have been many laws and changes made since the act was passed, of which DAPO’s are one.

    When did the pilot start?

    The pilot started 27th November 2024 and is running in Greater Manchester and three London Boroughs of Croydon, Bromley and Sutton. The pilot is expected to last two years during which other police force areas will join. So far, we are aware that forces covering Cleveland and North Wales will join the pilot in 2025.

    Are DAPO’s and Non-molestation Order’s similar?

    Yes, in some ways they are similar. They are both obtained by a judge who will grant the order if they find it to be proportionate and necessary to protect that person and keep the abuser away. Also, the terms are similar – not to contact, approach, intimidate, threaten or harass, etc. The period the orders last are also similar, the average time being one year. There are no court costs and it can be obtained with or without the abuser’s knowledge (but they will have the right to contest). If the order is breached, it is a criminal offence which can lead to a custodial sentence of up to five years or a fine.

    The differences, are a DAPO can be put in place by the Police, British Transport Police, the victim/survivor themselves, a third party (organisations or concerned family and friends) and by the judge themselves if they believe it is required during a current court case.

    There are less restrictions in obtaining a DAPO than for a non-molestation order. For example, a DAPO can be obtained if it is the first abusive incident. There is no ‘significant duration’ for the length of the intimate relationship and no limited time frame to apply for the order after the incident.

    Extra enforcements can be put in place if required, such as:

    • Electronic monitoring (tagging)
    • Attendance at a drug, alcohol or behaviour change programme.

    Within 3 days of the DAPO being issued the abuser must report to the local police station and provide their name and address. The police may also take fingerprints and photographs. Failure to comply will be an automatic breach of the DAPO. The DAPO can also include provisions found in an occupation order such as excluding the abuser from the family home and /or allowing the victim back into it.

    How NCDV can assist with a DAPO

    We are following the pilot closely with a view to helping people obtain a DAPO in the pilot areas if this is the safest and best option for their circumstances. Any person referred to us by the police or another professional will have all their options discussed with them and the DAPO will become one of the options available to them.

    This information will be updated throughout 2025 and beyond to inform victims and professionals about the progression of the pilot and the roll-out of the DAPO. 

    By Fiona Bawden, Times Online (8th May 2007)

    “Steve Connor, a student at City Law School, is a man on a mission. Six years ago he was a fairly directionless 27-year-old. Today, as well as taking the Bar Vocational Course, he is chairman of the National Centre for Domestic Violence, a ground-breaking organisation that he dragged into existence after a friend could not get legal help to protect her from an abusive partner.

    Connor’s route to the Bar has been circuitous. In 2001 he returned from a year in Australia (he says that he would not dignify describing it as a gap year), and took a job as a process server in South London. The job (“I just saw it advertised in the paper”) was not quite as dull as it sounds. On one occasion he was threatened with a machete, on another, he was nearly stabbed by a man he had arranged to meet on Clapham Common to serve with a non-molestation order: “He’d seemed really friendly on the phone…”

    The turning point in his life came when a friend, who was being abused by her partner, turned to him for support. Connor went with her to the police. She did not want to press criminal charges so the police suggested that she visit a solicitor to take out a civil injunction. “We must have seen 12 solicitors in a morning. We just went from one to the next to the next to the next. Everyone was very eager to help until we sat down to fill in the forms for the legal aid means test,” he says. The woman, who had a small child, did not qualify for public funding. But, Connor says, her financial situation as it appeared on paper did not bear any relation to her financial situation in reality. “She had a part-time job and she and her partner owned their home. Yet she didn’t have any money. Her boyfriend was very controlling and controlled all the money; he kept the chequebooks and didn’t let her have access to the bank account.”

    The injustice of the situation got under Connor’s skin. “I just couldn’t believe that there was no help available to people who did not qualify for public funds but could not afford to pay.

    I just kept feeling that this must be able to be sorted if only someone would address it.”That “someone” turned out to be him.

    In 2002, thanks entirely to Connor’s doggedness, the London Centre for Domestic Violence was formed. It started out with him and a friend, but is now a national organisation, covering 27 counties, and has helped approximately 10,000 victims last year to take out injunctions against their partners.

    NCDV now has nine full-time staff, 12 permanent volunteers and has trained over 5000 law and other students as McKenzie Friends to accompany unrepresented victims into court. We have also trained over 8000 police officers in civil remedies available regarding domestic violence. The National Centre for Domestic Violence (NCDV) has branches in London, Guildford and Manchester and is on track to have branches in 16 areas within the next two years.

    NCDV specialises exclusively in domestic violence work and could be characterised as a cross between McDonald’s and Claims Direct. The high degree of specialisation means that its processes are streamlined: clients can be seen quickly and the work is done speedily and cheaply. “Sometimes, we will have one of our trained McKenzie Friends at a court doing 10 applications in one day,” Connor says.

    Clients are not charged for the service. NCDV staff take an initial statement: clients who qualify for legal aid are referred to a local firm; those that don’t get free help from the centre itself. It runs on a shoestring, heavily reliant on volunteers and capping staff salaries at £18,000 a year.

    Steve expects to qualify as a barrister this summer and hopes that having a formal legal qualification will give the centre added clout. “We are already acknowledged as experts and consulted at a high level, so I thought it would be helpful if I could back that up by being able to say I’m a barrister,” he says. He is just about to complete a one-year full-time BVC course at the City Law School (formerly the Inns of Court Law School) and, all being well, should be called to the Bar in July. Although Connor sees his long-term future as a barrister, he says that he has no immediate plans to practise. “I want to get NCDV running on a fully national level. Then I may take a step back and have a career at the Bar.”