Types of non-court dispute resolution
Mediation
A mediator is a neutral third party who helps separating couples discuss and agree on the terms of their separation. The mediator does not take sides or make decisions but facilitates conversations and provides guidance. Mediation allows couples to control the pace of discussions and work towards a solution that suits both parties. In our experience, mediation is most effective when both parties receive legal advice alongside the process.
Collaborative divorce
In a collaborative divorce, both parties and their specially trained lawyers commit to resolving matters without going to court. The process involves face-to-face meetings where both parties, alongside their lawyers, discuss issues openly and work towards an agreement. Other professionals, such as financial advisers or child specialists, may also be involved. This approach works best when both parties are committed to finding a solution that benefits the whole family.
Private Financial Dispute Resolution (PFDR) Appointments
A PFDR is a structured negotiation process where a privately appointed judge or experienced barrister assesses both parties’ financial positions and provides guidance on a fair outcome. This is similar to a Financial Dispute Resolution hearing in court but takes place in a private setting, allowing for a more tailored and less formal process.
Roundtable meetings
This approach involves both parties and their legal representatives meeting in person to negotiate a settlement. Roundtable meetings provide an opportunity for direct discussions and can be a practical way to reach an agreement without the need for court proceedings.
Arbitration
Arbitration is a structured process where an independent arbitrator is appointed to make a legally binding decision on a dispute. This option is commonly used for financial matters and child arrangements that do not involve safeguarding concerns.
Both parties agree on and appoint the arbitrator, who will review the case and make a decision based on the evidence presented. While arbitration can be more expensive than other non-court resolution methods, it is often a quicker alternative to court proceedings and allows for a more focused approach tailored to the specific circumstances of the case.
There are advantages and disadvantages to these methods which are best discussed with your solicitor, who can advise you on the best option for your situation.
Below are the advantages and disadvantages of mediation:
Pros:
- You can obtain legal advice alongside mediation
- A wide range of mediation styles are available
- This approach can lead to a faster resolution
- It is often more cost-effective compared to court
- It offers more control over the outcome, rather than giving the power to a judge to decide
Cons:
- No legal advice is provided by mediators
- It is voluntary - both parties must engage and if one party withdraws you cannot mediate
- Mediation is without prejudice; the conversations and discussions cannot be referred to in open court
- Any agreement made in mediation is not binding until it is drawn up into a consent order and approved by the court