header-logo header-logo

01 October 2025
Issue: 8133 / Categories: Legal News , Family , Mediation , Legal aid focus , ADR , Divorce
printer mail-detail

Mediation crisis on horizon

Increasing numbers of family mediators are cutting back on legal aid work or leaving the sector altogether due to low fees—creating a supply shortfall for low-income families

According to the Family Mediation Council (FMC), legal aid rates paid to mediators have remained unchanged for 25 years, leading to a 50% reduction since 2018 in the number of family mediators offering legal aid services. Consequently, families are having to wait longer for their initial mediation information and assessment meeting (MIAM) if they are on legal aid rather than paying privately.

The FMC report, ‘The state of family mediation’, published last week, states: ‘About a quarter of mediators who offer legal aid have stopped taking on new legal aid cases in the past year.

‘Furthermore, 55% say they envisage a point over the next year where they/their firm will need to stop taking on new legal aid cases, or ringfence time spent on them. The reduction in legal aid mediators is primarily driven by mediators not being able to afford to offer services on legal aid rates.’

Overall, however, the report found the amount of family mediation is growing, with a ‘particular increase’ since the court rules were amended in 2024 to encourage parties to consider non-court dispute resolution. According to Ministry of Justice statistics for 2023, 69% of mediations resolved the issues so the case did not go to court or went only for a consent order. Generally, only one in three potential mediations fail due to lack of participation by one of the parties.

FMC CEO Helen Anthony said the report found ‘awareness of family mediation is higher among the general public and professionals working with families. Access to family mediation is easier for many separating couples, and assurance of family mediation standards provides greater confidence in the quality of services’.

Issue: 8133 / Categories: Legal News , Family , Mediation , Legal aid focus , ADR , Divorce
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Bellevue Law—Lianne Craig

Bellevue Law—Lianne Craig

Workplace law firm expands commercial disputes team with senior consultant hire

EIP—Rob Barker

EIP—Rob Barker

IP firm promotes patent attorney to partner

Muckle LLP—Ryan Butler

Muckle LLP—Ryan Butler

Banking and restructuring team bolstered by insolvency specialist

NEWS
The Supreme Court has delivered a decisive ruling on termination under the JCT Design & Build form. Writing in NLJ this week, Andrew Singer KC and Jonathan Ward, of Kings Chambers, analyse Providence Building Services v Hexagon Housing Association [2026] UKSC 1, which restores the first-instance decision and curbs contractors’ termination rights for repeated late payment
Secondments, disciplinary procedures and appeal chaos all feature in a quartet of recent rulings. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, examines how established principles are being tested in modern disputes
The AI revolution is no longer a distant murmur—it’s at the client’s desk. Writing in NLJ this week, Peter Ambrose, CEO of The Partnership and Legalito, warns that the ‘AI chickens’ have ‘come home to roost’, transforming not just legal practice but the lawyer–client relationship itself
A High Court ruling involving the Longleat estate has exposed the fault line between modern family building and historic trust drafting. Writing in NLJ this week, Charlotte Coyle, director and family law expert at Freeths, examines Cator v Thynn [2026] EWHC 209 (Ch), where trustees sought approval to modernise trusts that retain pre-1970 definitions of ‘child’, ‘grandchild’ and ‘issue’
Fresh proposals to criminalise ‘nudification’ apps, prioritise cyberflashing and non-consensual intimate images, and even ban under-16s from social media have reignited debate over whether the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) is fit for purpose. Writing in NLJ this week, Alexander Brown, head of technology, media and telecommunications, and Alexandra Webster, managing associate, Simmons & Simmons, caution against reactive law-making that could undermine the Act’s ‘risk-based and outcomes-focused’ design
back-to-top-scroll