Recognising coercive control as a form of abuse is reshaping family law, influencing legal decisions and strengthening protections for victims. It has become a crucial issue in how courts address family violence, with a growing focus on patterns of behaviour.
In this article, Associate Natalie Stenzel explains what coercive control is and explores recent legal developments, including the landmark ruling in Pickford v Pickford [2024] FedCFamCIA 249, which has redefined how coercive control is assessed in family law proceedings. This shift in legal interpretation prioritises the impact of abusive behaviour on victims over the perpetrator’s intent, marking a broader commitment within the legal system to enhance protections for those experiencing family violence.
What is Coercive Control?
Coercive control refers to a pattern of behaviour designed to dominate, control or coerce a victim, often making them feel trapped and powerless in a relationship. Unlike physical violence, coercive control is more insidious, involving tactics such as:
- Financial abuse (e.g., restricting the victim’s access to money or pressuring them to action certain financial transactions)
- Social isolation (e.g., hindering or restricting the victim’s access to their family, friends and society)
- Surveillance and monitoring (e.g., tracking the victim’s movements or online activity)
- Threats and intimidation
- Gaslighting (i.e. manipulating a victim’s emotions and shifting the blame)
This form of abuse is recognised under the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) (‘the Act’), which defines family violence to include behaviour that coerces or controls a family member or causes them to be fearful (s4AB of the Act). The Act’s broad scope ensures that various manifestations of coercive control are legally recognised and addressed.
The concept of coercive control is also elaborated in various state legislations. For instance, the Domestic and Family Violence Protection Act 2012 (Qld) includes behaviours that are physically, sexually, emotionally or economically abusive, threatening, coercive or controlling, and that cause fear for safety or wellbeing. Similarly, the Domestic and Family Violence Act 2007 (NT) defines coercive control as a pattern of conduct that causes fear for safety, including controlling daily activities, isolating from social connections and depriving freedom.
In recent years, several Australian states have also taken significant steps to criminalise coercive control, reflecting a growing acknowledgment of its detrimental impact and displaying the interplay between family law and criminal law
- New South Wales: On 1 July 2024, NSW enacted laws making coercive control a criminal offence. Section 54D of the Crimes Act 1900 criminalises abusive behaviours intended to coerce or control an intimate partner, carrying a maximum penalty of seven years’ imprisonment.
- Queensland: From 26 May 2025, coercive control will become a criminal offence in Queensland, further aligning state laws with the national stance against domestic abuse. The criminal offence will impose a maximum penalty of 14 years imprisonment.
These legislative changes underscore a nationwide effort to recognise and penalise patterns of behaviour that constitute coercive control, even in the absence of physical violence.
Judicial Interpretation and Case Law
Australian courts have increasingly acknowledged the complexities of coercive control in family law proceedings. Recent judicial interpretations have recognised that coercive control is about the impact that the behaviour has on the victim rather than the intent of the perpetrator.
This was depicted in Pickford & Pickford [2024], which shows how courts are adapting to this evolving understanding of family violence by redefining how coercive control is assessed and interpreted.
Pickford v. Pickford [2024] FedCFamCIA 249
Background and Legal Context
In the landmark case of Pickford v. Pickford [2024], the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia addressed allegations of coercive control within the context of parenting proceedings. The parties were married for ten years before separating in 2020. Following separation, the mother disputed the father’s access to their two children, with the mother alleging a history of coercive and controlling behaviour perpetrated by the father against her. The case centred on an appeal whereby the father disputed the primary judge’s findings of family violence, particularly the coercive and controlling behaviours the mother alleged he had perpetrated against her. The court’s decision provides important clarification on the interpretation of s4AB(1) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth), as cited above.
Key Findings
1. Intention in Coercive Control
A central aspect of the court’s ruling is the determination that intention is not a necessary element for establishing coercive or controlling behaviour. The court reasoned that:
- The statutory definition emphasises the effect of the behaviour rather than the perpetrator’s intention.
- Requiring proof of intention would unduly constrain victims in establishing the impact of such behaviour.
- The protective and educative purposes of the Act would be undermined by an intention requirement.
This interpretation aligns with the growing recognition of the complex nature of family violence and may facilitate more effective application of the law in cases involving coercive control.
2. Evaluation of Coercive Behaviour
The court also endorsed a nuanced approach to evaluating allegations of coercive and controlling behaviour, drawing on precedents such as Olivier & Olivier [2020] FamCA 639. This approach considers:
- The form of the behaviour;
- Its intensity;
- The full context in which it occurs; and
- The impact on the alleged victim.
It emphasises the importance of objective evaluation rather than relying solely on a party’s subjective experience or perception.
Legal Implications of Pickford v Pickford
1. Evidentiary Standards
The decision may lead to a recalibration of evidentiary standards in family law proceedings. While potentially lowering the threshold for establishing coercive control by removing the need to prove intention on behalf of the perpetrator, it simultaneously calls for a more comprehensive evaluation of alleged behaviour.
2. Procedural Considerations
The court’s suggestion of using concise statements to summarise relationship dynamics and key incidents may influence case management practices in family law proceedings involving violence allegations.
3. Impact on Parenting Cases
The ruling underscores the significant impact that findings of family violence can have on parenting cases, particularly in relation to joint decision making and parental responsibility in cases involving coercive control.
Comparative Perspective
The court’s approach aligns with international trends in family law jurisprudence, as evidenced by its reference to the English Court of Appeal decision in Re H-N (Children) (Domestic Abuse: Finding of Fact Hearings) [2021] EWCA Civ 448. This demonstrates a growing international consensus on the need for a nuanced understanding of family violence in legal contexts.
Conclusion
The recognition and criminalisation of coercive control in Australian law represents significant advancements in protecting individuals from subtle yet profound forms of domestic and family violence and abuse. Recent case law like Pickford & Pickford represents a shift towards a more victim-centred approach, prioritising the lived experience of those affected by coercive control. By providing clearer guidance on the interpretation of coercive and controlling behaviour, the decision aims to enhance the legal system’s capacity to address family violence effectively. However, it also presents challenges for legal practitioners and judges in evidence gathering and evaluation.
The rulings emphasis on a contextual and comprehensive assessment of alleged coercive behaviour, while removing the need to prove intention, strikes a balance between protecting victims and ensuring procedural fairness. As the legal community grapples with the implications of this decision, it is likely to spark further academic and legal discussion and potentially influence legislative reform in the area of family and domestic violence.
RAMSDEN FAMILY LAW – HOW WE CAN HELP
At Ramsden Family Law, we specialise in handling complex family law cases, including those involving family violence and coercive control. With the recent landmark Pickford & Pickford [2024] ruling reshaping family law, it is crucial to work with experienced professionals who can navigate these evolving legal standards.
Our team of dedicated family law experts understands the impact of family violence, including coercive and controlling behaviour, and offers tailored legal strategies to protect your family’s best interests. Whether you are involved in a parenting dispute, facing allegations of family violence or seeking protective measures, we provide compassionate and informed support every step of the way. We prioritise your family’s safety and well-being, ensuring that legal proceedings are handled with the utmost care and respect for your situation.
If you are facing legal challenges related to coercive control, family violence or any other family law matter, do not hesitate to contact us.
The content of this article is intended to provide general guidance to the subject matter and must not be relied on as legal advice. Specific advice should be sought about your circumstances.
Posted in: Domestic Violence, Latest News
April 09 2025
