Skip to main content
UCL Logo Navigate back to homepage

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Study

    Study

    • Study at UCL
    • Prospective students
    • Current students
    • Accommodation
    • Careers
    • Doctoral School
    • Immigration and visas
    • Student finances
    • Support and wellbeing
  • Research

    Research

    • Research at UCL
    • Engage with us
    • Explore our Research
    • Initiatives and networks
    • Research news
  • Engage

    Engage

    • Engage with UCL
    • Alumni
    • Business partnerships and collaboration
    • Global engagement
    • News and Media relations
    • Policy and political engagement
    • Schools and priority groups
    • Give to UCL
  • About

    About

    • About UCL
    • Who we are
    • Faculties
    • Governance
    • President and Provost
    • Strategy
    • UCL's Bicentenary
  • UCL Logo Active parent page: UCL Faculty of Laws
    • About us
    • Study
    • Short Courses
    • Active parent page: Research
    • People
    • Alumni
    • News
    • Events

The Problematic Development of the Stalking Protection Order

By Dr Rory Kelly, Lecturer in Criminal Evidence and Criminal Law at UCL Laws

People walking down the street lined with shops on Tottenham Court Road

Breadcrumb trail

  • Faculty of Laws

Faculty menu

  • Current page: Publications
    • Policy Briefs

Breadcrumb trail

  • Faculty of Laws
  • Research
  • The Problematic Development of the Stalking Protection Order

Publication details

Kelly, Rory. (2020) ‘The Problematic Development of the Stalking Protection Order’, Modern Law Review, 83(2), 406-427. Available online: https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2230.12508 

Summary

In 2019, Parliament enacted the Stalking Protection Act. The Act introduces the stalking protection order (SPO); a civil measure the breach of which is an offence. The role of courts in assessing whether similar behaviour orders are penalties has attracted significant scholarly attention. This article examines instead the roles of Government and Parliament in developing the stalking protection order. The central contention is that the Home Office undertook a problematic consultation and the issues to which it gave rise were not addressed in later parliamentary debates. The result was the enactment of a coercive measure of unclear purpose and questionable efficacy. Assessing the roles of the executive and legislature in developing the SPO also allows for fresh insight into wider discussions of behaviour orders. Specifically, the article questions the language of ‘prevention’ that is ever present in such discussions and describes an important development for debates on whether behaviour orders are penalties.

UCL footer

Visit

  • Bloomsbury Theatre and Studio
  • Library, Museums and Collections
  • UCL Maps
  • UCL Shop
  • Contact UCL

Students

  • Accommodation
  • Current Students
  • Moodle
  • Students' Union

Staff

  • Inside UCL
  • Staff Intranet
  • Work at UCL
  • Human Resources
UCL Logo

University College London

Gower Street, London, WC1E 6BT

Telephone: +44 (0) 20 7679 2000

UCL social media menu

  • Link to Instagram
  • Link to LinkedIn
  • Link to Youtube
  • Link to TikTok
  • Link to Facebook
  • Link to Bluesky
  • Link to Threads
  • Link to Soundcloud
Here, it can happen.
Back to top

Essential

  • Disclaimer
  • Freedom of Information
  • Accessibility
  • Cookies
  • Privacy
  • Slavery statement
  • Log in

© 2026 UCL