Whilst it was to be expected that former Hollywood ‘It’ couple, Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie should make headlines whilst appearing at the Venice Film Festival this summer to promote individual projects, the stories reported were actually about the lengths taken to ensure they did not cross paths. In this piece, Chloe Hall looks at what this latest episode means for the feuding couple.
In an interview with Vanity Fair, Artistic Director, Alberto Barbera, was forced to explain that there was “no way” Brad Pitt and Angeline Jolie would encounter each other at this year’s Venice Film Festival - Ms Jolie would be leaving immediately after her film premiered on 29 August, so Mr Pitt could arrive on 31 August.
Thought the former couple split in 2016 and divorce was granted in 2019, financial proceedings have been rumbling on since 2021. Mr Pitt filed a lawsuit against Ms Jolie for “secretly selling shares” in their vineyard, Chateau Miraval, to which she responded with the emotional request for him to withdraw it so that their family can “start to heal”.
For her part, Ms Jolie has also filed a lawsuit in relation to abuse allegations against Mr Pitt during a flight taken by the whole family in September 2016, which he vehemently denies and was never charged following an investigation in to the claims.
If Ms Jolie came to see me as a client and raised concerns about her safety, then I would be advising her of the protective measures Family Courts are able to put in place, including a Non-Molestation Order. This is considered separately from criminal proceedings, because if the police had charged Mr Pitt and put in place bail conditions a Non-Molestation Order is not likely to have been necessary.
To obtain a conviction in a Criminal Court a Judge or jury would need to be satisfied “beyond reasonable doubt/be certain” that the alleged incident took place. However in the Family Courts, the Judge only need to satisfied “on the balance of probabilities/find it more likely than not” that the allegations are true. This can result in a situation where even if a Criminal Court does not find the allegations true, or a charge be brought, a Family Court still can.
Although the Family and Criminal Courts work separately, recently there has been a greater focus on joined up working between the two, including the ‘Disclosure of Information Between Family and Criminal Agencies and Jurisdictions: 2024 Protocol’ issued by the Crown Prosecution Service in March 2024.
Turning back to Ms Jolie’s situation, and possible protective measures that could be put in place, a Non-Molestation Order prevents a person (respondent) associated with the applicant from molesting them or a child. Molestation isn’t defined under the Family Law Act 1996, but is generally used to protect a party from violence, threats or harassment. The order can cover a range of behaviours, and is normally used to protect victims of domestic abuse. Some examples of previous cases are when the respondent:
- hung posters about the applicant outside the school where she worked.
- searched through the applicant’s handbag without her permission.
- wrote to the applicant in abusive terms.
Ms Jolie would be able to apply for a Non-Molestation Order, as she is ‘associated’ with Mr Pitt. This is due to the fact that they used to be married – she could also apply for an order in respect of their children. If they were not ‘associated’, an order could not be obtained. For example, if they were never married, never lived together, were never in an intimate personal relationship, then an order could not be applied for.
Since the parties are already in proceedings, if they were based in England or Wales, then the court would have the power to make a Non-Molestation Order without a formal application.
When granting an order, the court must consider:
- evidence of molestation
- the applicant’s need for protection
- the balance of probability is that judicial intervention is required to control the respondent’s behaviour, that is the subject of the complaint.
An order will likely not be granted if the applicant invites the respondent into their home, or where no other attempts to control the respondents behaviour has been made – for example, calling the police.
The Order can prohibit a wide range of actions from forbidding a respondent to use or threaten violence against the application, to forbidding communication and entering their home at a specific address or coming within a number of metres of it. The Order will be carefully drafted to ensure that the complained about behaviour is controlled.
The duration of an Order can be for a specified period of time, or ‘until further order’, effectively indefinitely. Breach of a Non-Molestation Order is an arrestable offence once granted.
If Ms Jolie were based in England or Wales, she may wish to consider the above, particularly if Mr Pitt’s behaviour is affecting her work commitments, and her children. If you feel you may fall in to the above categories and would like to explore your options, Dutton Gregory is on hand to assist you.
