Family Law Update – The Importance of a Written Agreement

A recent case concerning a couple who live in Poole, Dorset, highlights the importance of making sure any agreement reached when a couple split up is properly recorded within a legally binding agreement.

The case concerning Mr Ely and Ms Robson was considered by the Court of Appeal on 26 July 2016 and the main points were:

• In 1986, Mr Ely moved in with his girlfriend Ms Robson to live together in her home on Ashley Road in Poole.

• In 1987, Mr Ely purchased a property on Torbay Road in Poole, which Mr Ely and Ms Robson moved into to continue living together. However, that new home was owned only in Mr Ely’s sole name with a mortgage in his sole name. Ms Robson made no financial contribution to the purchase of their Torbay Road home.

• By 2005, Mr Ely and Ms Robson had 2 young children together, but their had relationship broken down. However, they remained living separate lives under the same roof at Torbay Road property.

• In 2007, there were court proceedings to sort out who was entitled the equity in the Torbay Road property. Mr Ely claimed that he should have 100% of the equity, whereas Ms Robson claimed the right to 50% of the equity.

• In August 2007, Mr Ely and Ms Robson met together in Poole Park in an attempt to try and resolve their differences before an expensive final court hearing was due to take place in September 2007. No one else was present at that meeting, but an unwritten (oral) agreement was reached (or was it?).

• Shortly after the meeting in Poole Park, Mr Ely’s solicitor wrote to Ms Robson’s solicitor, setting out what Mr Ely thought had been agreed, which amongst other terms included that the equity in the Torbay Road property would be split 80% to Mr Ely and 20% to Ms Robson when the property was sold at a future date.

• As a result of the agreement, the solicitors for both Mr Ely and Ms Robson wrote to the court asking for the hearing due to take place in September 2007 to be put back to later date, whilst the precise details of the agreement were recorded in a legally binding document.

• However, by 2014, the agreement had still not been recorded within a legally binding document and there had been no further court hearing to finalise the case. It seems that neither Mr Ely nor Ms Robson thought recording their agreement in writing was important! (a decision they would soon come to regret)

• During the seven years from 2007 to 2014, Mr Ely had continued to conduct himself as if there was a legally binding agreement in place; he allowed Ms Robson and other members of her family to live there.

• In 2014, Mr Ely wanted the property to be sold so that he could recover his 80% of the equity and pay only 20% to Ms Robson. However, she refused to accept that there had been any agreement in August 2007 and insisted that she received 50% of the equity.

• Ultimately, the Court of Appeal decided in July 2016 that Ms Robson was bound by the terms of the oral agreement reach at the meeting in Poole Park in August 2007. Therefore, Ms Robson was entitled to only 20% of the equity. (but had they got married, the outcome on divorce could have been very different)

The lessons to be learnt from this case are:

1. The laws which apply to married and unmarried couples concerning money and property when they split up are very different.

2. Whilst unromantic, a written financial agreement at the start of a relationship can save a lot of heartache and legal cost later, if things don’t work out as planned. (hope for best, but plan for the worst)

3. Dialogue between a couple who split up can be very useful to avoid the expensive legal bills and uncertainty of going to court. Whilst meeting in a public place is one option (so long as doing this is safe), other options for constructive and non-confrontational dialogue include support from specially trained family lawyers and mediators, who consider that going to court is very much a last resort for resolving a family dispute.

4. When an agreement is reached, it should be recorded in a legally binding document. Whilst an oral agreement might be upheld in a court, a lot of stress and legal cost can be avoided by having a legally binding document prepared by a family law solicitor. (you might not be as lucky as Mr Ely)

If you or someone you know wishes to discuss a family related problem, please make contact with a member of Kiteleys Family Team via any one of Kiteleys’ offices, for an initial free telephone assessment.

Divorce Law Update – Guidance on “Financial Needs”

The Family Justice Council have recently published their Guidance to help family lawyers work out how to meet a families financial needs at the time of a divorce:

https://www.judiciary.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/guidance-on-financial-needs-on-divorce-june-2016-2.pdf

However, that 64 page Guidance is primarily intended for judges and legal advisers.

Therefore, Kiteleys Family team hope that this brief summary is easier to understand:

• When a couple divorce and cannot decide how their property, savings/investments, pensions and income should be divided between them, they can ask specially trained family lawyers to help them short this out.

• There are different ways for family lawyers to help a divorcing couple, which might include working with a mediator or arranging a “roundtable” meeting.

• Asking to a Family Court judge to make a decision is the last resort.

• All family lawyers and judges must apply the law, which states that any decision must have regard to all the circumstances of the case, first consideration being given to the welfare of any child aged under eighteen.

• These legal rules allow a broad discretion on how the available family assets should be shared between the divorcing couple. There is no precise way to calculate who should get what. Every case is different.

• As a result, the Guidance is intended to help family lawyers work out the best way for a divorcing couple to move on with their lives separate and apart, with a focus on those cases where the available assets do not exceed the parties’ needs.

• Whilst there is the starting point of equality, needs commonly provide a justification for a departure from the principle of “equal sharing”.

• “Needs” in most cases, mean the need for housing and also paying a mortgage and domestic bills (aka “income needs”). However, future income needs can also be relevant, such as the need for an income in retirement

• To measure “need”, both parties should produce detailed budgets. “Need” will then be measured by assessing available financial resources and also the standard of living enjoyed during the relationship.

• Family lawyers will strive to stretch finite resources, but where resources are modest, meeting the children’s needs will usually be given priority.

• A party may be expected to suffer some reduction in their standard of living, if that is necessary in order for both parties to gain independence from each other as part of a “clean break”

• However, in some cases a complete or immediate “clean break” will not be appropriate if it will cause one party “undue hardship” in the future.

If you or someone you know needs to discuss a family law problem in strict confidence, please make contact with a member of Kiteleys Family team via any one of Kiteleys’ offices.

Are children receiving the recommended diabetes checks?

A study of just over 27,000 young people, and children, showed that only around 25% of people over the age of 12 received all 7 of the annual checks, such as eye exams. These missed checks have been deemed “very worrying” by Diabetes UK.

The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence produced guidelines which state that all children with diabetes should have their blood sugar levels checked every year, and those over the age of 12 should also have 6 other health checks. Included in these health checks are: growth measurement, blood pressure, kidney function, cholesterol checks, eye screening and foot examinations.

Out of the recommended checks the most commonly missed are cholesterol testing, eye screenings and foot examinations.

The purpose of these checks is to aid the spotting of diabetes causing harm to organs, which if spotted early enough be less severe.

A Consultant in Paediatric Endocrinology and Diabetes, Dr Justin Warner, is of the opinion that it is “completely unacceptable that some of these checks were being missed, or not recorded”. He goes so far as to say that “health staff should strive further to ensure all checks take place and are recorded, and commissioners should provide adequate resources”.

The Director of Policy and Care Improvement at Diabetes UK, Bridget Turner, confirmed that “there remains considerable variations in the levels of care provided. This is very worrying because if children and young people are not supported to manage their diabetes well in early life, they are more likely to be at risk of debilitating and life threatening complications in adult life, such as, amputations, blindness and the possibility of a stroke”.

From the study NHS England will now be working closely with clinical commissioning groups to improve the provision of effective integrated diabetes services.

Should Mediation Become Compulsory In Disagreements Over Patient Care?

An anaesthetist at the Royal Berkshire Hospital in Reading is of the opinion that mediation should be made a legal requirement throughout England and Wales to settle disputes surrounding patient care.

During his speech at Euroanaesthesia 2016 Mr Danbury was quoted as saying the following:

“Mediation can be done informally, perhaps by asking another clinician within the institution to act as an honest broker. If this fails, then a formal mediation process can be initiated with legal representation on both sides. Mediation costs a great deal less than going to court and often preserves the relationship between the clinical team and their patient/representatives, which can otherwise be severely damaged by the rigors of court proceedings”.

Some see mediation as a form of allowing the relationship between the medical team and the patient and or the families to continue. However, not all families wish to be persuaded by mediation and would prefer their thoughts to be voiced in court, where they feel that all steps have been taken to ensure the right decision has been made.

Not all disagreements are over a difference of opinion, some are simple misunderstandings. Mr Danbury went on to say:

“Sometimes misunderstandings can occur very easily, one doctor may not explain something very well to a family, but then once a colleague intervenes, the situation can be calmed down very quickly. But if this should fail, then the default option should be to go to formal mediation by an independent third party. It is never too late to talk, and the cost savings to the NHS would be immense”.

Mediation is not suited to all patients and their families involved, they are often in an extremely vulnerable state and mediations would not be fair in all situations, they may feel bullied into accepting treatment that they do not wish to receive.

Whatever the outcome families need to know that they have done all they can, and sometimes this means pursuing matters through the court.

Sorting out Finances on Divorce

This month (April 2016) the Family Justice Council of England and Wales has published it’s guide, Sorting Out Finances on Divorce. It is designed for “those who have normal levels of wealth” and is intended to demystify what is a complex area of law, but at over 50 pages is still a daunting read.

Therefore, Kiteleys Family team have summarised some of the key points:

• The objective in all cases is to achieve a result which reflects the best possible outcome for each family.

• The law does not set out hard rules or a mathematical formula. Each case has to be considered on it’s particular circumstances.

• The welfare of children under the age of 18 has to be “the first consideration”.

• In most cases a “fair outcome” is based on meeting the family’s “needs”. As a result, in most situations, assets will not just be divided 50/50.

• Only in very rare and extreme cases will a spouse’s share of the assets be reduced because of his or her bad conduct.

• Achieving a “clean break” should be the aim, for the spouses to achieve financial independence from each other, but this might not be fair or possible where there are children or the marriage has been long.

• The honest “disclosure” of all financial information is very important.

• Reaching an agreement away from court is generally cheaper and quicker than going to court for a judge to make a decision, but an agreement will still need to be formally recorded in writing to be legally binding.

• It may be sensible to seek legal advice on the wording of an agreement document, such as a “consent order”, to ensure that it is legally correct.

However, this summary can only briefly touch on the complex issues which a family face when spouses separate and divorce. Also, the recently published guide does not deal with the entirely different and complex law concerning financial arrangements between couples who are not married when they split up.

If you have any family legal problem, then help is available via Kiteleys Family team.

A Fixed Fee Meeting and a Fixed Fee Divorce are available.

Contact any Kiteleys Office to be put in touch with a specialist family law solicitor.

Prenuptial Agreements

Prenuptial agreements can provide a measure of certainty and the means to protect pre marriage assets, inheritance and existing family commitments such as children from a previous marriage. A prenuptial agreement is a written formal agreement entered into by the couple before they get married that sets out what they have agreed will happen to their assets in the event of a future divorce. Any couple who are contemplating marriage or entering into a civil partnership can enter into a prenuptial agreement.

Whilst it is better to agree arrangements before the marriage takes place, it is possible to enter into similar agreements once a marriage has occurred. These are known as post nuptial agreements.

Generally speaking you should sign the prenuptial agreement some weeks before the date of the actual wedding or civil ceremony.   If you rush into a prenuptial agreement UK courts tend to be open to an argument that one party was under a degree of duress and this can mean that the prenuptial agreement will not be enforced by a UK court. Many divorced people wish they had made their partner sign a prenuptial agreement prior to marriage. However, there are various reasons why people do not agree to sign a prenuptial agreement. Many people think it is unromantic.

Whilst prenuptial agreements are not legally binding in England and Wales, the case of Radmacher v Granitino 2010 confirmed that the Supreme Court will give weight to the existence of a prenuptial agreement when deciding what Financial Orders to make on divorce provided that it is entered into freely and it is not unfair to one party.

If you need help with any family matter, please get in touch with a member of our Family Team.

The myth of “common law marriage”

The importance of protecting yourself legally has been emphasized again in a recent case. Joy Williams had co habited with Norman Martin in a property they owned together as ‘tenants in common’ for 18 years before he died. When he died Ms Williams expected to receive his half of the property. However, Mr Martin died suddenly without having updated a very old Will and instead Mr. Martin’s half of the property was bequeathed to his estranged Wife.

“The idea of a common-law husband or wife is an urban myth.”

 This case outlines the fundamental importance of ensuring that you leave an up to date Will that reflects your current circumstances and guarantees that your wishes concerning the devolution of your estate are carried out.

In addition when co-habiting with a partner, no matter for how long, you do not accrue any legal rights in relation to the distribution of their assets after they die. Until such time as the legal position of co-habitees reflects modern society it is vital to make a Will to ensure that your assets are left to whom you want them to be when you die.

If you would like to make a Will, please contact us and one of our specialist lawyers will be happy to talk through the process with you.

Misdiagnosis of Sepsis

There has been extensive press coverage in recent days regarding the difficulties encountered by medics when diagnosing cases of sepsis. This has seen the Health Secretary, Jeremy Hunt, apologise for the shortfalls in NHS care relating to this serious condition (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-35410840).

So, what is sepsis? Sepsis is triggered by infection and causes the immune system to go into overdrive causing inflammation in the body’s tissues and therefore interfering with the flow of blood. Rapid diagnosis and treatment of the condition is required as failure to do so can lead to multiple organ failure and eventual death. It is estimated that over 100,000 people in the UK are admitted to hospital each year with sepsis, of which around 37,000 will die. An estimated 12,000 of these deaths are avoidable.

There are a number of symptoms to look out for (http://www.nhs.uk/Conditions/Blood-poisoning/Pages/Symptoms.aspx); however there are certain categories of people who are at increased risk of developing sepsis. These include:

• Those with a weakened immune system.

• Those who are already in hospital.

• The elderly, the very young and pregnant women.

• Those who have just had surgery or have been involved in an accident.

Experts assert that the trouble with diagnosing sepsis is that it can present in a number of different ways posing obvious difficulties to medics when trying to make an accurate diagnosis. The key is in recognising that a patient has the condition before the “red flag symptoms” develop (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-35409266).

Following the identification of the difficulties that are being encountered by healthcare professionals NICE have begun consultation earlier this month to produce guidelines which will assist in speeding up diagnosis and treatment of sepsis (https://www.nice.org.uk/news/press-and-media/nice-consults-on-guideline-to-speed-up-recognition-and-treatment-of-sepsis).

A drive to improve the identification and treatment of sepsis, resulting in the prevention of avoidable deaths would be welcomed by all I am sure. However, it is disappointing that this is still being contemplated rather than implemented when these difficulties were identified and reported on by the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman nearly 3 years ago. (http://www.ombudsman.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0004/22666/FINAL_Sepsis_Report_web.pdf)

Family Law – developments for 2016

As we start a New Year, the Head of Kiteleys Family Team, Colin Mitchell, considers what changes might come into effect during 2016 which affect families:

Support for relationships in difficulty – on 11 January 2016, the Prime Minister David Cameron, announced that Government funding for relationship support will be doubled, for organisations like Relate, Marriage Care and One Plus One, to help couples stay together

Life Chances Strategy – at the same speech on 11 January 2016, David Cameron also announced a plan for significantly expanding parenting provision, to include the introduction of a voucher scheme for parenting classes, via the Troubled Families Initiative which was launched in 2012.

No Fault Divorce Bill – on 22 January 2016, the second reading of this new law will take place in the House of Commons, in attempt to change the law which has been in place for over the past forty years.

Currently, the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 requires that anyone applying for a divorce in England and Wales (“the Petitioner”), must prove one or more of five facts, three of which are based on their spouses fault; adultery, unreasonable behaviour or desertion for two years. To avoid the need to rely on one of these fault based facts, the Petitioner must wait until they have been separated at least two years before apply for divorce.

These current legal requirements have long been considered to be unsatisfactory by such family law organisations such as Resolution and many family Court Judges.

Therefore, this proposed new legislation was introduced to Parliament by Richard Bacon MP in October 2015 and this is currently making its way through the legal process to potentially become law 2016. This new law could for the very first time allow a divorcing couple to submit a “joint Petition” based merely on the fact that their marriage has “broken down irretrievably” without either needing to blame the other for their marital breakdown.

However, another significant proposed change is that once the first stage of divorce has been achieved with the grant of “Decree Nisi”, the divorce cannot be finalised with the grant of “Decree Absolute” until twelve months later, whereas the current legal procedure requires a wait of only six weeks.

Calculation of financial needs on divorce – long overdue progress could be made during 2016 by the Ministry of Justice, to build on the Law Commission’s 2014 recommendation that there be a method for divorcing couples to calculate how best to distribute their available assets to meet their financial needs. The Family Justice Council is also planning to produce guidance on how Family Court Lawyers consider the calculation of “needs”.

Non disclosure in matrimonial financial proceedings – following from the Supreme Court decisions in the cases of Sharland and Gohil (October 2015), during 2016 we could see further cases of couples who divorced some years ago, but who now return to the Family Court to reconsider their financial decisions if evidence has subsequently come to light that one spouse was concealing significant wealth at the time that the original Financial Court Order was made.

Improvements in the Family Court Service? – from April 2015, the route for a routine divorce in the South West of England was centralised at a Regional Divorce Centre in Southampton. This has resulted in significant delays with the time taken by the Family Court to process divorce papers, sometimes taking months rather than weeks. During 2016, the new South West Regional Divorce Centre will hopefully become more efficient at dealing with the large volume of divorce documents and so these delays will decrease.

If you have any questions concerning any family problem, make contact with any Kiteleys Office, to arrange an initial free telephone assessment with one of our specialist Family Law Solicitors.

Enforcement of Family Financial Orders

What is the best way to ensure that money is paid or property is transferred once a Family Financial Order is in place compelling a family member to pay money or to transfer property to another member of that family (e.g. on divorce)?

This is the question the Law Commission is currently considering with consultation taking place between March and July 2015, the aim being to then report on the results of the consultation sometime in 2017.

This question is being asked because there is a tendency for people to think that the legal process is over once an agreement has been reached or a Court has made a decision. However, sometimes a Family Financial Order is not complied with and needs to be enforced. Therefore, the Law Commission’s consultation is the first step to consider possible reforms to the existing methods of enforcement to make them more effective and easier to use.

Problems with the current legal system include:

• There are several different enforcement options to choose from, which can be confusing. Also, the rules governing enforcement of Family Financial Orders are scattered around in different laws and regulations.

• The existing enforcement methods are usually created for use in non-Family civil cases (eg, the payment of debt). However, Family cases are often very different from other cases because non-compliance with a Family Financial Order can have a direct effect on a families’ ability to keep a roof over their head and provide properly for their children. Therefore, a family can be at risk of losing their home if a quick and effective method of enforcing a Family Financial Order is not available.

• Family Financial Orders might last for many years, such as when maintenance payments for the benefit of a child are ordered for a young child and are to last until the child completes their education. However, over that time the parents circumstances can change and the enforcement methods need to be able to swiftly address those changes. Whilst the family creditor might already have some knowledge of the debtors circumstances, it is possible that enforcement of a Family Financial Order is sought a long time after the end of the parties’ relationship. Therefore, the availability of up to date financial information can significantly influence the choice of enforcement method.

• Many emotions are often at play in Family Proceedings which may not feature in other Civil Proceedings. These emotions can influence the reasons for non payment of money, the action or inaction taken by those owed money, and the direction and progress of enforcement proceedings.   If the creditor and debtor have an ongoing relationship as parents to their children, ineffective enforcement litigation can do great damage to their parental working relationship to the detriment of their children.

To address these problems, the Law Commission shall consider several options:

• Whether a single comprehensive set of Family Procedure Rules would improve the enforcement of Family Financial Orders.

• What new powers might be given to the Family Court to help obtain up to date financial information and progress general enforcement applications? Allowing the use of existing laws could make it easier for information requests to be made directly to Government departments (including Revenue and Customs) and private organisations, to obtain details about the debtors employment and financial circumstances.

• In what ways can information best be provided to the public about enforcing Family Financial Orders? More and more people are trying to take action without a solicitor as “litigtants in person”. Therefore, the Law Commission will consider improvements to include information being published in both electronic and paper format.

• Should the applicant be required to consider mediation before making an enforcement application to the Family Court? Since 22 April 2014, an applicant to the Family Court in financial cases, has had to show that they have considered mediation before making an application, but the same requirement does not currently apply to applications enforcing Family Financial Orders.

Full details of the Law Commission consultation paper can be downloaded for free from their website http://www.lawcom.gov.uk/project/enforcement-of-family-financial-orders/

Kiteleys Family Team will continue to monitor developments and provide updates via further website articles. In the meantime, if you wish to discuss any issues raised by this article or other family matters generally, please contact a member of Kiteleys Family Team at any one of Kiteleys’ offices.

The Pitfalls of Online Divorce

According to Sir Michael Pitt, in a speech he gave at the Modern law Conference on 11 March 2015, online divorces are more likely to be amicable (86%), compared to those using a traditional lawyer (56%), but there are good levels of satisfaction of about 80% for all providers (both traditional lawyers and online providers). Sir Michael is Chairman of the Legal Services Board which is the organisation responsible for overseeing the provision of legal services.

These statistics are taken from a soon to be published Legal Services Board research project, which has examined the experience of just over 180 couples petitioning for divorce, comparing an online divorce with a traditional face to face service with a solicitor.

When asked about these statistics, Colin Mitchell, who is a specialist family law solicitor and Head of the Family Team at Kiteleys Solicitors, made the following observations:

• What this study of a simple online divorce process does not take into account, is the need that most divorcing couples have for help resolving disputes over financial issues or children arrangements. The research project itself was not designed to test the technical quality of advice supplied by online divorce services.

• Approaching a “traditional lawyer”, such as the service provided by Kiteleys Family Team, rarely results in a divorcing couple ending up in Court. This is because specialist family law solicitors work closely with other local professionals such as mediators. This face to face service enables divorcing couples to communicate in a constructive and non-confrontational way to resolve their disagreement, which is not possible via an online service.

• It is significant that whilst 56% of couples who divorce via a “traditional lawyer” describe their experience as “amicable” (compared to 86% for online divorce), the overall satisfaction levels for both options are virtually the same. This suggests that those couples who have face to face legal help when their divorce is not amicable, are still just as satisfied at the end because of the face to face help they receive to resolve their dispute.

• The recent Supreme Court ruling in the case of Kathleen Wyatt and Dale Vince highlights the problem that merely getting divorced (which is often the easy and amicable part when a married couple split up), does not in itself provide any certainty or safeguard concerning financial issues.

If you have a family problem which you need help resolving, Colin Mitchell is available to speak with for a free initial telephone assessment on 01202 393506

.

Divorce and money…

On 11 March 2015, The Supreme Court (the highest Court in England and Wales) has made a decision confirming that an ex-wife could pursue a financial claim against her ex-husband, some 20 years after they divorced!

This case concerned Kathleen Wyatt who married Dale Vince in 1981. They had one child from their relationship, before they separated in 1984 and then divorced with the Grant of Decree Absolute in 1992. Ms Wyatt remained the primary carer for their young son whilst Mr Vale went on to become a very successful businessman and multi-millionaire.

However, no agreement was formally recorded within a Court order concerning any limits on the ongoing financial responsibility by Mr Vince to Ms Wyatt.

Therefore, when Ms Wyatt made a financial claim against her ex-husband in 2011, the Court had to consider whether her claim should be allowed after such a long time following their separation and divorce?

Whilst the judges in the High Court and then the Court of Appeal disagreed, the judges in the Supreme Court have now had the final say, by confirming that there is no time limit for ex-spouses to apply to a Court for a financial settlement following a divorce.

This means that whether you are a millionaire or have more modest wealth, it is essential to remember that a divorce alone with only the grant of Decree Absolute (which means you can then re-marry) does not provide any safeguarded against your ex-spouse making a financial claim against you at any time in the future.

A previous example of an ex-husband being caught out by this rule was when in 2010 the £56million Euromillions jackpot winner Nigel Page had to make a large payment to his ex-wife who he had divorced 10 years earlier, because they had not recorded any financial agreement within a Court order.

Therefore, it is very wise to invest some extra time and money in proper legal advice to ensure that there are no legal loose ends at the time of divorce which might cost you a lot of money and heartache in future years.

This advice from Kiteleys Solicitors Family Team starts at £150 (which includes VAT) as a fixed fee for an hour meeting with one of our specialist family law solicitors. Contact Colin Mitchell on 01202 393506 for an initial free telephone assessment.

Options For Family Problem Solving

Most people going through a divorce or separation would rather avoid having to go to court if possible. We will help you consider how best to solve your family problem in order to reach a fair outcome as quickly and cost-effectively as possible.

Your options to achieve an out of court agreement include:

• Direct discussion

• Roundtable Meeting with professional help (including the Collaborative Family Law process)

• Family Mediation

• Arbitration

• “Traditional” solicitors approach

• Court proceedings

Direct Discussion

• It is seldom easy for a couple to communicate when their relationship breaks down, but some couples can do this with little or no outside help.

• Direct discussion can help you keep your legal costs to a minimum.

• Communication can be face to face or via other methods such as email, text message or Skype.

• It is important to keep your discussions private. It is not appropriate for very personal discussions to take place in a very public way, such as via a social media sites, eg. Facebook or Twitter.

• Direct discussion should only be attempted if it safe to do so.

Roundtable Meetings (including Collaborative Family Law)

• If a couple meeting face to face alone is not appropriate, then a meeting could take place with each person accompanied by a specially trained family lawyer.

• The aim of both of the family lawyers is to help a couple address all issues in a constructive and non-confrontational way.

• The Collaborative Family Law process is a special way for a roundtable meeting to be arranged. Each person appoints their own collaboratively trained lawyer and you and your respective lawyers all meet together to work things out face to face. Both of you will have your lawyer by your side throughout the process. Everyone involved signs an agreement that commits you to trying to resolve the issues without going to court.

• Here at Kiteleys both Colin Mitchell and Jonathan Harvey are trained Collaborative Family Lawyers.

Family Mediation

• A family mediator is trained to help a couple resolve their dispute by meeting with the couple.

• The mediation session might take place with the couple and the mediator in the same room, or sometimes it is better for the couple to sit apart in a separate room with the mediator “shuttling” between them.

• The couple will not usually be accompanied by their lawyers when meeting with the mediator, but each should take separate independent advice from their own family lawyer.

• An agreement reached in mediation is not legally binding is until it has been recorded in a written document. This is something your family lawyer will need to do, because this cannot be done by the mediator.

• Therefore, if family mediation is the right dispute resolution option for you, we can refer you to a local mediator, work with you throughout the mediation process and prepare a legally binding written agreement document at the end of the process.

Arbitration

• The family arbitration process is similar to the court process. An independent arbitrator will consider your case and make a legally binding decision. However, the important difference from the court process is that you to remain in control of the arbitration process, but the arbitrator will have costs for their service which will need to be paid.

• We work closely with family arbitrators at College Chambers http://www.college-chambers.co.uk/family-arbitration in Southampton.

Traditional approach

• Whilst it is often best for a couple to sit down together with professional help in order to solve their family problem, the most appropriate method of dispute resolution will depend on how they each choose to engage in the problem solving process.

• Sometimes it is still necessary to adopt a “traditional” approach to problem solving, which may include letters or emails being exchanged between solicitors.

• However, this method of communication can sometimes result in delay, confusion and frustration.

Court Proceedings

• Despite the best endeavours of the professionals involved, sometimes it is necessary for an application to be made to start a court process in order to help a couple resolve their dispute.

• The full court process will be lengthy and costly.

• Wherever possible the family lawyers and judge will still make every endeavour to help a couple reach an agreement “out of court” without the need for the case to proceed through the full legal process up to and including a court decision being made after a contested final hearing.

• Starting the court process can allow you to gain the benefit of a court managed timetable to help prevent delay and ensure that everyone is focussed on reaching a prompt and cost effective agreement.

• The court should ensure each party fully complies with his or her obligations, such as providing full details of income, capital and pension.

• Very seldom do a couple who start the court process end up proceeding through the full legal process up to an including a contested final hearing.

Contact Kiteleys Family Solutions team for a free consultation about your circumstances and to ask any questions

Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Bill approved

Following the story we posted earlier on the Kiteleys blog on the subject of the chances of same sex marriage becoming legal in the UK, a Bill of approval has since been passed.

The Commons voted in favour of the Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Bill, by 400 to 175, a majority of 225, following a full day’s debate; just 35 didn’t use their right to vote.
A true advocate for the change was culture secretary Maria Miller who stated her driving ambition for change; “In the 19th Century, Catholics, Baptists, atheists and many others were only allowed to marry if they did so in an Anglican Church, and in the 20th Century changes were made to recognise married men and married women as equal before the law.”

Her campaign looked to alter the current opinion saying “Parliament should value people equally in the law, and enabling same-sex couples to marry removes the current differentiation and distinction.

This alteration to the Bill seeks to understand that marriage is “an institution with a long history of adaptation and change” Miller continued

On hearing the successful result of her campaign she commented “The depth of feeling, love and commitment is no different between same-sex couples than opposite-sex couples. This Bill enables society to recognize that commitment in the same way, too, through marriage.”

Although it has caused a stir within the Conservative party, MP Cameron has stood his ground on the changes that were necessary to a future evolving England; he said it is “an important step forward” and that the moves “strengthens society.”

The bone of contention before the Bill was passed was whether the Bill wouldn’t contain a “quadruple lock”. This has been defused as the Government has implemented four separate measures to protect the religious freedom of those who do not agree with same-sex marriages on religious grounds.

Changes to Family Procedure Rules

From February 1st the Family Procedure Rules have been amended after recommendations by the Family Justice Review made in 2011 come into force. These review effects Part 25 (Experts and Assessors) which stipulates cutting the number of expert witnesses called in family cases.

This will represent Rule 25.1 and means that evidence from experts such as psychologists and doctors would be heard if thought ‘reasonably required’, with tougher tests intensifying, allowing evidence only if it is deemed ‘necessary’.

The president of the Family Division Sir James Munby said: ‘There is no question of families being denied the chance to call evidence they need to support their case or being denied a fair hearing. But the new test gives judges more control over expert evidence in family proceedings.

‘The rule change gives family judges the means to make robust case management decisions to make sure the expert evidence is focused and relevant.’

The main reasoning behind the changes is to cut down on court time, causing excessive court delays and overall costs.

The Ministry of Justice said: “Additional factors are specified in proceedings involving children. These include what other expert evidence is available, including any obtained before the start of proceedings, and whether the evidence could be obtained from another source, such as one of the parties or professionals already involved in the case.”

If you would like more information regarding Family Law and the relevant changes please contact our Family Law Specialist Colin Mitchell at the Bournemouth office on 01425 278866.