“The nature of the allegations included in support of the application can succinctly and accurately be summarised as involving complaints of “coercive and controlling behaviour” on F’s part. In the Family Court that expression is given no legal definition, In my Judgement, it requires none. The term us unambiguous and needs no embellishment. Understanding the scope and ambit of the behaviour however, requires a recognition that “Coercion” will usually involve a pattern of acts encompassing, for example, assault, intimidation, humiliation and threats. “Controlling behaviour” really involves a range of acts designed to render an individual subordinate and to corrode their sense of personal autonomy. Key to both behaviours is an appreciation of a “pattern” or “a series of acts” the impact of which must be assessed cumulatively and rarely in isolation.”

And at paragraph 60 Hayden J says: “In A County Council v LW & Anor [2020] EWCOP 50 I gave an ex tempore judgment in which I highlighted the need for vigilance, in the Court of Protection, when seeking to understand and identify coercive and controlling behaviour in the context of particularly vulnerable adults. In my judgement, it is crucial to emphasise that key to this particular form of domestic abuse is an appreciation that it requires an evaluation of a pattern of behaviour in which the significance of isolated incidents can only truly be understood in the context of a much wider picture. The statutory guidance published by the Home Office pursuant to Section 77(1) of the Serious Crime Act 2015 identified paradigm behaviours. In A County Council v LW (supra) emphasised the features of that guidance which struck me as particularly apposite in the context of vulnerable adults. They are strikingly relevant here:

• Isolating a person from their friends and family.
• Depriving them of their basic needs.
• Monitoring their time.
• Monitoring a person via online communication tools or using spyware.
• Taking control over aspects of their everyday life, such as where they can go, who they can see, what to wear and when they can sleep.
• Depriving them access to support services, such as specialist support or medical services.
• Repeatedly putting them down such as telling them they are worthless.
• Enforcing rules and activity which humiliate, degrade or dehumanise the victim.
• Forcing the victim to take part in criminal activity such as shoplifting, neglect or abuse of children to encourage self blame and prevent disclosure to authorities.
• Financial abuse including control of finances, such as only allowing a person a punitive allowance.
• Control ability to go to school or place of study.
• Taking wages, benefits or allowances.
• Threats to hurt or kill.
• Threats to harm a child.
• Threats to reveal or publish private information (eg threatening to “out” someone).
• Threats to hurt or physically harming a family pet.
• Assault.
• Criminal damage (such as destruction of household goods).
• Preventing a person from having access to transport or from working.
• Preventing a person from being able to attend school, college or university.
• Family dishonour.
• Reputational damage.
• Disclosure of sexual orientation.
• Disclosure of HIV status or other medical condition without consent.
• Limiting access to family, friends and finances.