The decision the Court has to make in respect of who can live in a property is not an easy decision for them to make. The Court has to consider lots of different factors before deciding who can remain living there and who cannot.
The Court applies what is called the ‘Balance of Harm’ Test. The Court will consider:
(a)the housing needs and housing resources of each person and of any relevant child;
(b)the financial resources of each person;
(c)the likely effect of any order, or of any decision by the court not to make an Occupation Order, on the health, safety or well-being of each person and of any relevant child; and
(d)the conduct of each person in relation to each other and otherwise.
The Court has to consider the risk to any person including children and therefore if the Court believes that the applicant (person applying for the Order) or any relevant child is likely to suffer significant harm attributable to conduct of the Respondent (opposition) if an order is not made then the Court should make the Order. The Order should not be made however if the Court believes that:
(a)the respondent or any relevant child is likely to suffer significant harm if the order is made; and
(b)the harm likely to be suffered by the respondent or child in that event is as great as, or greater than, the harm attributable to conduct of the respondent which is likely to be suffered by the applicant or child if the order is not made.
If an occupation Order is made, it does not change the ownership of the property, it simply confirms who can remain living in the property. The Court can also make an Order as to who shall pay the mortgage or rent, repair and maintain the property. The Court will only make an occupation Order if it is really necessary as it prevents a person who is legally entitled to occupy a property from living in their home. An Occupation Order can only be made for 6 months.