header-logo header-logo

31 March 2021
Issue: 7927 / Categories: Legal News , ADR , Family
printer mail-detail

Mediation vouchers offered to families

Lawyers have welcomed a £1m family mediation voucher scheme launched by the Ministry of Justice

The government will contribute up to £500 towards the mediation costs for eligible cases. Applicable disputes include those concerning a child, or concerning family financial matters where the parties are involved in a dispute relating to a child. About 2,000 families are likely to receive the help.

Parties must attend a Mediation Information and Assessment Meeting (known as a MIAM) unless exempt before certain court proceedings can be launched. The mediator at the MIAM will discuss the voucher scheme with attending parties. The voucher can not be used for the MIAM, which costs about £90.

Neil Russell, family law partner at Seddons, said the scheme was ‘an excellent initiative.

‘No doubt the government is hoping that this will save money otherwise spent through the courts resolving family disputes concerning money and children. Mediation is often the preferred route to reduce family conflict and in the right cases can be very effective.    

‘Although the £500 may not enable the parties to complete a mediation, it might just persuade them of the benefits of mediation so that they decide to invest further in the mediation process to avoid contested court proceedings.’

Law Society president I Stephanie Boyce said: ‘Steps to address the backlog in the family court system are helpful.

‘However, data shows a clear and significant correlation between the removal of private family proceedings from the scope of legal aid funding and a reduction in mediations. We continue to recommend the government address this by bringing at least early advice in private family proceedings back in scope.

‘Solicitors are best placed to assess all alternative dispute resolution (ADR) options with their clients―such as arbitration, early neutral evaluation, negotiation and conciliation. We encourage a review of these other forms of ADR to ensure parties are able to access the best solution for them.’

Issue: 7927 / Categories: Legal News , ADR , Family
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Cripps—Radius Law

Cripps—Radius Law

Commercial and technology practice boosted by team hire

Switalskis—Grimsby

Switalskis—Grimsby

Firm expands with new Grimsby office to serve North East Lincolnshire

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Property team boosted by two solicitor appointments

NEWS
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
Recent allegations surrounding Peter Mandelson and Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor have reignited scrutiny of the ancient common law offence of misconduct in public office. Writing in NLJ this week, Simon Parsons, teaching fellow at Bath Spa University, asks whether their conduct could clear a notoriously high legal hurdle
A landmark ruling has reshaped child clinical negligence claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Jodi Newton, head of birth and paediatric negligence at Osbornes Law, explains how the Supreme Court in CCC v Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2026] UKSC 5 has overturned Croke v Wiseman, ending the long-standing bar on children recovering ‘lost years’ earnings
A Court of Appeal ruling has drawn a firm line under party autonomy in arbitration. Writing in NLJ this week, Masood Ahmed, associate professor at the University of Leicester, analyses Gluck v Endzweig [2026] EWCA Civ 145, where a clause allowing arbitrators to amend an award ‘at any time’ was held incompatible with the Arbitration Act 1996
back-to-top-scroll