Vulnerable women and children in refuges are at risk because their addresses have been inadvertently disclosed through court documents, the Observer can reveal.
The addresses of women’s refuges – where those who have suffered abuse including domestic violence, rape and coercive control seek protection – are highly confidential, and staff and residences sign strict agreements not to disclose their locations.
However, a refuge made submissions at a high court hearing, raising concerns that the secret addresses are sometimes disclosed inadvertently in court documents, causing “significant harm”.
The hearing, in front of Mrs Justice Knowles, related to child contact arrangements between a mother residing with her child at the refuge and the child’s other parent, who was seeking to trace them via a court application.
In a letter to the court, a barrister representing the refuge, Charlotte Proudman, said it was the third instance in which the high court had served an order on their client seeking to disclose the confidential address.
On one occasion, a father who was a perpetrator of domestic abuse discovered the location and began to stalk his child and their mother, meaning they had to leave the refuge, the court was told. The father later abducted the child, taking them abroad. The mother’s passport had already been confiscated by the high court, and she was unable to travel to collect the child, causing them further distress.
Proudman told the Observer: “This is a common problem that became more acute during the pandemic, with rising levels of domestic abuse and nowhere else for victims to turn. However, the government has ignored repeated warnings about this issue.”
She said that in many cases court orders are made against migrant women who have no recourse to public funds. “They have fled abusive relationships and are living in refuges with no intention of abducting their child. But the abusive ex-partner goes to the high court to get a ‘location order’, which can lead to the mother and child – or children’s – passports being confiscated. This is a punitive and draconian order that should be used sparingly. Migrant women are especially vulnerable to domestic abuse and coercive control.”
A former partner may discover the address of a refuge through court documentation that should not have been disclosed to them, she said.
Proudman wrote: “There are wider concerns that this process in obtaining urgent location orders is being used by alleged and found perpetrators to continue their abuse. In this particular case I am instructed that there is a non-molestation order in place because of abusive behaviour.”
The refuge acknowledged “the wide-ranging nature of the orders is understood given the alleged risk of child abduction”, and that risk is “not underestimated”.
However, it was put to Knowles, the family court’s lead for domestic abuse, that a balancing exercise must be struck between the need to serve the urgent orders and the impact on refuges and women staying in them. If the confidential address of a refuge becomes public knowledge, it may need to close and relocate at significant financial cost, said Proudman.
She added: “We actively campaigned to change the law in the domestic abuse bill to stop this from happening but the government refused to take action, suggesting it was not a common issue. However, we have evidence that the problem continues to plague victims and refuges.
“At the hearing on 30 June, the refuge invited the court to give a judgment on the issue of “public interest and importance.”
The court ordered no further steps should be taken to serve the order until further submissions were made.
Knowles has invited the justice secretary and several women’s charities to assist the court on how other arrangements might be made for the service of court orders on those staying at refuges.
The Observer was able to report on the case after applying to vary the automatic reporting restrictions that apply to family court proceedings.
A spokesperson for the judiciary said: “The issue of service of family court proceedings on people in refuges is a matter under consideration by the Family Procedure Rules Committee.”
A Ministry of Justice spokesperson said: “Protecting victims is our number one priority, and we are working with the judiciary to see how we can build on existing safeguards for those in refuges, including procedures to keep locations confidential.
“This government is … increasing funding for victim support to £460m over the next three years, implementing the Domestic Abuse Act and overhauling how the family courts protect domestic abuse victims.”
In the UK, call the national domestic abuse helpline on 0808 2000 247, or visit Women’s Aid. In Australia, the national family violence counselling service is on 1800 737 732. In the US, the domestic violence hotline is 1-800-799-SAFE (7233). Other international helplines may be found via www.befrienders.org
