Services
The measure should be read as notified.
We review the resolution, its validity and the facts that are attributed as non-compliance. The prohibition of approaching and the prohibition of communicating may have different scopes; clarifying them helps prevent new incidences.
Article 468 requires the conviction or action not complied with and the conduct to be determined. The will of the other person does not replace a court decision on its validity. Before returning to contact, the status of the measure should be clarified.
Understanding to Decide
Anonymised case study
The evidence and risk were assessed at a protection hearing, with the involvement of the parties.
Supreme Court · Second Chamber
Supreme Court · Second Room · 2024
The court held that a person prohibited from approaching someone must leave after noticing a chance encounter. The restriction applies to the recipient of the order, not to the protected person.
ECLI:ES:TS:2024:3075
Read moreSupreme Court · Second Room · 2019
The court held that a breach was completed when an unanswered call was recorded and its source could be identified. The protected person’s awareness of that call was relevant to the prohibited contact.
ECLI:ES:TS:2019:4218
Read moreSupreme Court · Second Room · 2018
The plenary court held that distance must be measured as specified in the order or, if no method is stated, in a straight line. It resolved differing approaches among provincial courts.
ECLI:ES:TS:2018:4361
Read moreAnswers to guide you
19 Brief answers with references to official regulations.
Precautionary protection during the trial and the penalty comes from a conviction. Both must be respected as long as they are in force, according to their judicial content.
It does not revoke a court order. You must respect it until the competent body agrees to its modification or cessation.
No. Reconciliation is not a substitute for a judicial decision. Contact may remain a breach as long as the prohibition remains in force.
It can do so, according to its circumstances, if it allows the protected person to know the contact and its origin. It is not essential to have a conversation.
Yes, if it violates an existing prohibition and the elements of the offence are present. The scope of prohibited channels and contacts must be read.
Consult this service ↗See FAQ ↗Interposing another person does not guarantee that contact is lawful. The indirect communication must be assessed in accordance with the content of the resolution.
Consult this service ↗See FAQ ↗Those who have restricted the approach must turn away when warning the coincidence. The incident should be documented and the judicial distance strictly respected.
Consult this service ↗See FAQ ↗The obligation to comply with the prohibition rests with the addressee. You cannot transfer to the protected person the duty to prevent your non-compliance.
Consult this service ↗See FAQ ↗First, the provisions of the judicial decision must be taken into account. The case law uses, in the absence of precision, straight line measurement.
There is no automatic exception. They should organize channels compatible with the resolution and seek judicial clarification if necessary before contacting.
Consult this service ↗See FAQ ↗No. The petition does not itself suspend its validity. You must wait for a court decision to change the obligation.
It can be requested, providing circumstances and alternatives. The judicial body must assess protection, necessity and proportionality; the concession is not automatic.
Yes, article 468 provides for imprisonment in certain cases, including those relating to measures or penalties for the protection of persons within the legally provided scope.
Yeah. The court may review the protection and assess more restrictive measures in accordance with legal requirements, in addition to investigating the breach.
Yeah. Article 468 provides for conduct that disables, disturbs or fails to comply with certain obligations on technical control devices.
Not automatically. Knowledge of resolution and concrete conduct should be analysed. It is essential to keep and review your notifications.
Consult this service ↗See FAQ ↗It must not be taken for granted. Consideration should be given to what measure was in force, its content and the procedural situation at the time of contact.
Full resolution, notifications, any modifications and contact or proximity tests allow us to study validity, scope and knowledge.
Yeah. It retains the original communication and provides its data to the authorities. There is no need to respond in order to assess the possible non-compliance.
Family and successions
In Matrimonialistas you will find information about related civil actions and claims.
A restraining order is in force and the other person suggests meeting. Does that make contact lawful? Private consent does not change a court order.
Read exactly what the order prohibits: approaching, communicating or both. Keep the order and its notifications. Do not try to clarify matters by contacting the protected person if contact is prohibited. Obtain advice before acting.
If a possible breach is investigated, the review considers whether the measure was in force, knowledge of it and the precise conduct, including digital contact. An accidental encounter requires examination of its circumstances rather than automatic conclusions. Any change must be requested and decided through the proper legal route.
At penal.info, we review the order, evidence and defence or protection options. Bring the complete decision and a timeline. Comply with the existing measure unless it is lawfully changed.
Book an appointment with María Morales at penal.info.
Time to listen
Consult with María Morales Elbaz, lawyer in Madrid.