Grant non-molestation orders based on past abuse, not just risk of future harm

Survivors are often refused non-molestation orders because judges say abuse is not "recent". This leaves victims exposed if abusers are briefly on "good behaviour" e.g. during court cases. Even some survivors of near-fatal attacks are told they must wait to be harmed again before getting protection. A lot of domestic abuse is cyclical so pauses don't remove risk. The law must recognise this & close the loophole: allow survivors protection based on past abuse without waiting for further violence.