Economic abuse is increasingly recognised as a pervasive yet often hidden form of domestic abuse. It can devastate victims’ financial independence, self-worth and ability to escape abusive relationships. In recent years, legal and policy developments in England & Wales have acknowledged this form of abuse and taken steps to provide redress and protection. Family law plays a key role in addressing economic abuse, particularly during the breakdown of intimate relationships, when individuals seek protection or financial orders.
Economic abuse refers to behaviours that control a person’s ability to acquire, use and maintain financial resources. It may involve restricting access to money, indebting the victim, sabotaging employment or education opportunities, or coercive control over financial decisions. While it may accompany physical or psychological abuse, economic abuse can exist in isolation and still have profoundly detrimental effects.
The legislative landscape in England & Wales has evolved to recognise that abuse within a domestic context is not limited to visible violence. The Domestic Abuse Act 2021 was a landmark in this regard, as it included economic abuse within its definition of domestic abuse for the first time. Though the Act does not create new criminal offences, it frames economic abuse as a serious concern that courts, police, and legal professionals must consider.
Recognising Economic Abuse Under the Domestic Abuse Act 2021
The introduction of the Domestic Abuse Act 2021 marked a paradigm shift in how abuse is conceptualised in English and Welsh law. Section 1 of the Act defines domestic abuse more broadly than before, incorporating not only physical and sexual abuse but also emotional, controlling or coercive behaviour, and notably, economic abuse.
Under Section 1(4), economic abuse means “any behaviour that has a substantial adverse effect” on a person’s ability to:
– acquire, use or maintain money or other property; or
– obtain goods or services.
The Act provides examples of economic abuse that may include preventing a victim from working, withholding money, taking control of someone’s bank account against their wishes, placing debts in their name, or destroying property important to one’s livelihood (such as a car needed for work).
In explicitly naming economic abuse, the law validates victims’ experiences and signals to public authorities, including the family courts, that such behaviour constitutes a genuine, punishable form of domestic abuse. While the Act itself is largely procedural and supportive rather than punitive, it has influenced the approach of family law proceedings. Family courts must now consider experiences of economic abuse alongside other forms of harm when making decisions about child arrangements, financial settlements, and protective orders.
Protective Court Orders Available to Victims
For victims of economic abuse, immediate protection from the perpetrator is often essential. Family law provides a range of protective measures, notably non-molestation orders and occupation orders under Part IV of the Family Law Act 1996.
Non-molestation orders can be used to prevent an abuser from harassing, assaulting, or threatening the victim. Economic abuse often overlaps with other forms of coercive control, and these orders can be framed to reflect financial behaviours. For example, they can include injunctions preventing the abuser from contacting the victim in a manner that involves threats related to financial matters or from pressuring the victim to take responsibility for jointly incurred debts.
Occupation orders allow the court to regulate the occupation of a family home. In situations where economic abuse includes restricting access to housing or threatening homelessness, an occupation order can ensure that a victim remains in the home and the perpetrator is excluded. While economic abuse on its own may not always meet the threshold, when presented with broader coercive behaviour, courts may grant such orders to protect the victim’s living situation and restore stability.
These protective orders are often especially significant where the economic abuse centres around control of accommodation, entitlement to rent or mortgage payments, or deliberate threats of eviction used to exert power.
Financial Remedy Proceedings and Economic Abuse
One of the most tangible ways economic abuse manifests in family law is during financial remedy proceedings following divorce or dissolution of a civil partnership. Here, the court’s role is to fairly and equitably distribute the assets and finances between the parties. The Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 guides the court, and section 25 lists factors that need consideration, including the parties’ incomes, needs, standard of living, contributions, and conduct.
While conduct is not usually a deciding factor unless it is egregiously bad, economic abuse could meet this threshold—particularly where one party has deliberately sabotaged the other’s career, hidden assets, or incurred debt to undermine the other’s financial freedom. For example, where one partner has systematically depleted joint finances to punish the other or deliberately prevented them from accruing pension entitlements or savings, a court may consider adjustments to compensate for the economic harm. The costs of rebuilding finances or seeking therapy for trauma caused by abuse may fall under pressing financial needs.
In 2019, the Court of Appeal case of W v H (Divorce: Financial Remedies) reflected on how coercive and controlling behaviour, including economic abuse, could affect the division of assets. Although rare, such acknowledgements suggest a growing judicial awareness of the way economic abuse can distort a relationship’s financial context and a spouse’s future ability to support themselves.
Legal practitioners must be careful, however, as the conduct criterion remains high; simply demonstrating financial imbalance or even neglect may not be sufficient. Detailed evidence showing the intention and sustained nature of the abuse is critical to persuading the court.
Coercive Control and Criminal Law Overlap
Economic abuse often exists within a broader pattern of coercive control. Under the Serious Crime Act 2015, Section 76 makes “controlling or coercive behaviour” in an intimate or familial relationship a criminal offence when it causes serious alarm or distress that has a substantial adverse effect on day-to-day life.
While economic abuse itself is not a standalone criminal offence, actions such as preventing a partner from working, monitoring their spending, or confiscating wages may fall within coercive control if they form part of a sustained, controlling pattern. This connection is essential, as a conviction or charge under Section 76 can be cited in family law proceedings to support applications for protective orders or to provide context in child arrangements disputes.
Police officers, tasked with investigating domestic abuse, are now trained to recognise signs of economic abuse. Increasingly, prosecutors rely on patterns of behaviour—rather than a single act—to articulate a narrative of abuse. As such, family law solicitors need to be mindful of the potential criminal implications and liaise with criminal practitioners where parallel proceedings are ongoing.
Children and the Impact of Economic Abuse
In cases where children are involved, family courts have an even greater obligation to understand the implications of economic abuse. Section 1 of the Children Act 1989 makes the child’s welfare the court’s paramount consideration in any decision related to upbringing.
Economic abuse may indirectly or directly harm a child—for example, by limiting access to housing, nutrition, education or basic financial stability. Where one parent restricts the other’s access to funds or refuses to comply with child maintenance orders, it not only victimises the partner but also affects the child’s wellbeing.
Perhaps more insidiously, economic abuse can create a destructive co-parenting environment. For instance, one parent might refuse to make agreed school contributions or sabotage the partnership’s financial cooperation, causing stress and instability that impacts the child. These factors may be relevant in deciding residency or contact orders. The courts will consider whether a parent’s financial control reflects poor parental judgment or a failure to meet their child’s needs.
CAFCASS, the Children and Family Court Advisory and Support Service, plays a role in assessing domestic abuse in child arrangement disputes. Their understanding of economic abuse—including its psychological impact—can shape their recommendations. However, practitioners note that recognition remains inconsistent and training continues to evolve.
Legal Aid and Barriers to Justice
One of the cruellest consequences of economic abuse is how it can create profound barriers to accessing legal advice or justice. Victims often lack the financial means to instruct a solicitor, pay court fees, or even know their rights. Legal aid exists to provide support in such situations, although recent reforms have narrowed eligibility.
Under the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012 (LASPO), applicants in private family law cases (such as child arrangements or financial relief) must prove that they are victims of domestic abuse to qualify for legal aid. Thanks to campaigning efforts and amendments over time, economic abuse is now recognised as part of this qualifying threshold.
Applicants can evidence economic abuse through supporting documents, such as criminal proceedings, civil injunctions, evidence from health professionals, or financial control details. However, accessing and compiling such proofs remains a challenge. Many victims are unaware that economic abuse qualifies, or struggle to produce documentation due to situational dependence on the abuser.
Organisations like Rights of Women and Surviving Economic Abuse have been instrumental in raising awareness, producing guidance and working with legal aid funders to ensure appropriate handling of these nuanced cases.
Reform, Education and Cultural Change
While legal recognition of economic abuse in England & Wales is a significant step forward, implementing protections remains a work in progress. The family courts are learning to interpret and weigh the complex indicators of economic abuse, and inconsistent outcomes suggest more guidance and training are necessary.
Professional education for judges, solicitors, and CAFCASS officers must keep pace with emerging understanding. Economic abuse demands nuanced assessment; it does not always leave tangible traces. Cultural myths—for example, that one partner managing the household finances is benign—can obscure control dynamics. Encouraging judicial curiosity and sensitivity can help uncover hidden patterns.
There are calls for further reform. Campaigners are advocating for clearer legal routes to recover money lost due to economic abuse, compensation mechanisms, and civil remedies akin to harassment or stalking claims. Others seek more explicit statutory guidance for family law judges on how to factor economic abuse into orders and decisions, especially in financial and children’s matters.
One notable area of interest is pension sharing. Women, particularly older divorcees, often emerge from divorces with significantly less pension wealth—an outcome sometimes rooted in economic control that discouraged or prevented them from earning or contributing to pensions. Addressing the long-term economic fallout of abuse remains a challenge that family law must continue to evolve to meet.
Conclusion
Economic abuse is finally gaining the recognition it deserves within the family law system of England & Wales. From protective injunctions to consideration in financial remedy and child arrangements proceedings, the legal framework is increasingly responsive to the unique harms this form of abuse causes. Yet, the path to full justice is not smooth: victims face evidential hurdles, patchy recognition, and the enduring personal toll of financial control.
A coordinated approach—including legal advocacy, public education and reform—is key to ensuring that family law becomes not only a site for legal resolution but also a space where victims of economic abuse can reclaim autonomy, security and dignity. As understanding deepens, the hope is that family law will be a beacon for those seeking not just safety, but long-term financial justice.