Family Law Awards 2020
Shortlist announced - time to place your vote!
Court of Protection Practice 2020
'Court of Protection Practice goes from strength to strength, having...
Jackson's Matrimonial Finance Tenth Edition
Jackson's Matrimonial Finance is an authoritative specialist text...
Latest articles
Rattan v Kuwad [2021] EWCA Civ 1
(Court of Appeal (Civil Division), Macur, Moylan and Asplin LJJ, 11 January 2021)Financial remedies – Maintenance pending suit – Order set aside – AppealThe wife’s appeal from...
SMO (a child) (by their litigation friend (acting as a representative claimant pursuant to CPR 19.6)) v TikTok Inc. and others [2020] EWHC 3589 (QB)
(Queen's Bench Division, Warby J, 30 December 2020)Practice and procedure - Anonymity – 12-year-old bringing claim against TikTok for breach of data protection legislation – Claimant...
Coronavirus: Separated Families and Contact with Children in Care FAQs (UK)
The House of Commons Library has published a paper providing brief information in response to some key questions regarding the impact of the Coronavirus outbreak on separated families,...
The Benefit Of Cohabitation Agreements
Many couples in Britain today live together without being married or forming a civil partnership. For some, the legal status of this situation isn’t well understood - do unmarried cohabitants...
Wills and Coronavirus
With the coronavirus pandemic we have seen a significant increase in demand for Wills. However, the social distancing, lockdown and shielding measures introduced by the Government to help fight the...
View all articles

Maybe now we will realise that the court process is not the answer?

Apr 21, 2020, 15:58 PM
Slug :
Meta Title : Maybe now we will realise that the court process is not the answer?
Meta Keywords :
Canonical URL :
Trending Article : Yes
Prioritise In Trending Articles : Yes
Date : Apr 21, 2020, 15:58 PM
Article ID :

The issues stemming from COVID-19 have brought into sharp focus the realities and limitations of the  court system. 

One of the positives of litigation and usually the most common reason for choosing to go down the route of utilising the court system is to ensure that a timetable is in place.  The court process provides a structure in which deadlines are set and the parties are kept on a track to resolution.  For months the parties prepare for the next hearing on the understanding that even in the unfortunate circumstance that they cannot settle matters, there will be a determination and an end.  However, it appears to have become increasingly common for the court to list at risk hearings and adjourn hearings at the last minute due to lack of judicial availability.  Indeed, in the six months leading up to today’s Covid-19 pandemic I am aware of three hearings, including a three day Final Hearing, being adjourned on the court’s own motion with only 36 – 48 hours’ notice being provided.  Clients are left in an unenviable position not just financially but emotionally.  Clients, solicitors and counsel have by that point done nearly all of the preparatory work for the hearing and counsel’s brief fees have already been incurred.  The money that clients are prepared to spend on representation in order to reach a conclusion is wasted and families are often left in untenable living arrangements.  The court users are let down by the very system in which they have put their faith.

As a result of the COVID-19 pandemic the physical courts have closed, cases are being re-timetabled, hearings adjourned, and guidance circulated urging parties to seek alternative dispute resolution.  It is well known that not all cases are capable of being resolved by agreement or without the intervention of someone neutral and authoritative.  That does not mean that the only solution is to rely on the court system and perhaps now the alternatives available can be brought to the fore:

  1. Arbitration
  2. Early Neutral Evaluation
  3. Private FDR

These alternatives still provide clients with either a guaranteed outcome or the input of someone akin to a Judge. Indeed, they provide clients with more control over the timetable and a quicker resolution.  The additional cost of the arbitrator or private Judge are like to be less than what a client would spend on the legal fees incurred during drawn out court proceedings.  That is without factoring in the emotional cost of giving the parties control of location, time and choice of Judge. 

Hopefully these options will now be given more consideration whilst the court process cannot provide the answers and that there can be a sea change in the attitude towards instinctively issuing proceedings.  The upshot must be that more people can experience a more comfortable process and the court system is less burdened making it more available for those who have no alternatives. 

Categories :
  • Articles
Tags :
  • Arbitration
  • courts
  • Mediation
Provider :
Product Bucket : Family Law (General)
Load more comments
Comment by from