Part 3: Powers for dealing with domestic abuse Section 36: Further provision about requirements that may be imposed by orders
The requirements attached to a DAPO must not, so far as practicable, conflict with the perpetrator’s religious beliefs, interfere with the perpetrator’s work or attendance at an educational establishment (so, for example, a prohibition on the perpetrator entering a defined area should not normally cover his or her place of work), or conflict with another court order (subsection (1)). If it is not practicable to avoid the conflict, given the necessity to protect the victim, then the court may still impose the requirement.
	Where a DAPO imposes requirements on the perpetrator, it must specify the person (an individual or an organisation) who is responsible for supervising compliance (subsection (2)). Such individuals or organisations could, for example, include the local authority or a recognised provider of substance misuse recovery services. The court must receive evidence on the suitability and enforceability of a requirement from this person (subsection (3)). The person responsible for supervising compliance with the requirements is subject to certain duties as specified in subsection (5), including a duty to notify the police if the perpetrator has complied with the requirements or failed to do so. In the first instance, it may be appropriate depending on the nature of the requirement to make an application to vary or discharge the DAPO and in the latter instance the perpetrator could be charged with an offence of breach of the order (see Section 39 below). The perpetrator is under a duty to keep in touch with the person responsible for supervising compliance with the requirement (subsection (7)).