ENGLAND & WALES Law and Practice Contributed by: Alex Carruthers, Oliver Heeks and Sian Brooks, Hughes Fowler Carruthers
There have been recent developments in this area. The Transparency Implementation Group published a report in April 2023 titled “Transpar - ency in the Financial Remedies Court”, which gave a number of recommendations to increase transparency in the Family Court. This report has led to a number of recent updates, as follows. • From 27 January 2025, journalists and legal bloggers are able to report on what they see and hear in all family courts in England and Wales if a transparency order is granted. The open reporting provisions mean that there is a presumption that a transparency order is granted, unless there is a legitimate reason not to. • This recent change follows the success of Family Court Reporting Pilot, which started in January 2023 and was progressively rolled out thereafter. Parties are not able to anonymise proceedings. Anonymisation is controlled by the court, not by the parties. There is a presumption that any transparency order protects the anonymity of the children and their families. 2.9 Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) Mediation is a frequently used method that par - ties use to resolve financial matters. In fact, before issuing financial remedy proceedings, parties must attend a Mediation Information and Assessment Meeting (MIAM) to see wheth - er their case is suitable for mediation. During mediation, an independent mediator will meet with the parties (either together or separately) and attempt to facilitate the resolution of finan - cial matters. The mediator is impartial and can - not give legal advice. This method is particularly popular in low-conflict cases; however, it may not be appropriate where there is a power imbal - ance in the relationship.
Early neutral evaluation and private FDR hear - ings involve both parties appointing a neutral evaluator (typically an experienced judge or bar - rister) to provide an indication as to what they think a fair outcome would be, following disclo - sure and submissions from the parties. This can facilitate settlement and prevent the unneces - sary incurrence of legal fees associated with going to a final hearing at court. The indication is not binding, however. Therefore, if the parties ignore the indications and do not negotiate rea - sonably thereafter, the legal fees associated with the FDR hearing are effectively wasted. Arbitration is becoming increasingly popular as a method for parties to deal with financial disputes upon divorce. Arbitrators must be members of the Institute of Family Law Arbitrators, governed by the Arbitration Scheme. The decision of the arbitrator is binding; however, their decision will need to be drafted as a court order and sealed by the court after the arbitral award is given. The key advantage of arbitration is that parties have more control over the process, as they can pick the arbitrator and the venue. Further, the process circumvents court time delays and therefore is quicker and can save costs. From 29 April 2024, the Family Procedure (Amendment No 2) Rules 2023 (SI 2023/1324) came into effect, instituting a number of changes that are designed to increase the use of ADR. • The definition of “non-court dispute resolu - tion” at FPR 2.3(1)(b) has been widened to mean “methods of resolving a dispute other than through the court process, including but not limited to mediation, arbitration, evalua- tion by a neutral third party (such as a private FDR process), and collaborative law”. • A change to the conduct of MIAMs – FPR 3.9(2) has been amended to impose a
126 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook