Simplifying Family Disputes: Non-Court Dispute Resolution

According to the Family Procedure (Amendment No 2) Rules 2023 (SI 2023/1324), effective from 29 April 2024, all parties involved are required to explore non-court dispute resolution options before filing a Court application. 

This process involves mandating all involved parties to participate in a Mediation Information and Assessment Meeting (MIAM)* with an accredited mediator before submitting any application to the Court, unless any party qualifies for specific exemptions, as discussed further in this article.

In an MIAM meeting, the mediator will discuss all options for non-court dispute resolution.

• Cases involving proof of domestic violence and where the safety of any individual is threatened, particularly in instances of power imbalance.

• The safety of a child is at risk, or

• The matter is urgent.

In these instances, considering the specifics of the case, it might be more suitable to file an application with the Court and avoid non-court dispute resolution. Experienced family law lawyers can assess if resolving disputes outside of court is suitable, and if not, they can help you file the appropriate application to the Court when needed.

Mediation is a voluntary process in which an unbiased third party, known as the mediator, helps the involved parties achieve a mutually acceptable agreement. Mediators do not make decisions for the parties or provide legal advice, but use their skills to encourage and facilitate discussions, help identify common ground and ultimately help the parties reach an agreement.

In an arbitration, the involved parties agree to submit their dispute to an arbitrator, who makes a binding decision based on the evidence provided. This method can address financial disagreements and issues related to children. It is less formal than court trials and can be customised to meet the particular requirements of the parties involved.

Negotiation involves discussions between parties aiming to achieve an agreement, either directly or through their respective lawyers. This approach enables the parties to maintain control as they resolve issues among themselves rather than risking outcomes by entrusting decisions to the court.

• Cost-effective:  Resolving disputes outside of court is generally more cost-effective than using the legal system.
• Time efficiency:  Court proceedings can be exceedingly lengthy, often taking months or even years to resolve. Non-court options typically allow for quicker resolutions where both parties can reach an agreement willingly.
• Preservation of relationships:  Non-court dispute resolution emphasises collaboration and communication, which can help maintain relationships. This is crucial for co-parents or family members who must continue interacting after resolving a dispute. 
• Flexibility: These methods offer more flexibility regarding scheduling and the process. Parties can work at their own pace and choose a method that best suits their needs instead of being limited to the court timetable. 
• Control: Parties maintain greater control over the result, as they actively participate in the decision-making process instead of a judge enforcing a binding decision upon them, which helps preserve relationships to the greatest extent possible.

At each phase of the proceedings, the Court is required to assess whether alternative dispute resolution methods are suitable. Additionally, the Court holds the authority to postpone proceedings to motivate and permit the parties to participate in non-court dispute resolution.

All parties are now required to submit a statement detailing their stance and options on non-court dispute resolution seven working days before any Court hearing. They must inform the Court about the non-court dispute resolution efforts they have made and justify why a Court Order is necessary or explain their unwillingness to participate in non-court dispute resolution, along with their reasons for seeking the Court's intervention.