The world’s richest couple, Jeff and McKenzie Bezos, have recently made public the details of their divorce and financial settlement.
The details of their split and consequent financial settlement have been the subject of speculation for the media, public and lawyers for months since it was announced that the couple would be divorcing earlier this year, particularly as the parties did not enter into a pre-nuptial agreement.
For those not in the know, Jeff Bezos is the founder and chief executive officer of Amazon, the online retail giant established in 1994, a year after the parties were married. Until the divorce and subsequent financial settlement, Jeff and McKenzie Bezos were the richest couple in the world, with Jeff’s estimated net worth totalling approximately $137 billion.
The parties have now revealed on Twitter that they have reached agreement in relation to their finances. As well as 75% of her stock in Amazon and the voting rights in her shares, McKenzie has relinquished all of her interest in the Washington Post and Blue Origin to Jeff.
Although the divorce was dealt with in America, in England and Wales the starting point for long marriages would usually be a 50:50 split.
The court will however look at a wide range of factors when determining the financial division under section 25 if the Matrimonial Causes Act 1925, such as the financial resources of the parties, their financial needs and obligations, the standard of living enjoyed before the breakdown of the marriage, the age of the parties and the duration of the marriage, any physical or mental disabilities of either party, contributions made towards the family, the conduct of each of the parties and any benefits each party will lose the chance of acquiring. Thus, after taking all of these factors into account, the resulting division of the parties’ finances may not necessarily result in a 50:50 split. In the case of Jeff and McKenzie Bezos, the overall split was far from 50:50, although specific details of their settlement or their negotiations have not been published. However, McKenzie will still retain a 4% state in Amazon, worth at least $35 billion.
For those non-celebrities without billions in the bank, a pre-nuptial agreement may still be worth considering, particularly if they are concerned about how their finances will be dealt with on separation, they have children from before their marriage whose interests they wish to protect, or if they wish to preserve certain assets or to avoid potential dispute in the future.
Pre-nuptial agreements stipulate how the parties hold their assets and how these will be divided on the event of a separation. Where the document has been drafted correctly, the parties have taken independent legal advice, there was full financial disclosure, there was no fraud, misrepresentation or undue pressure and the terms of the agreement are ‘fair’, then a court will usually seek to uphold the agreement, although it is impossible to complete oust the jurisdiction of the court and make a completely legally binding document that the court must follow. However, they can and do often help to alleviate animosity and protracted court room battles in the event of divorce. The parties know where they stand right from the beginning of the relationship and certain assets can be preserved and protected from claims by the other party in the event of a relationship breakdown.
Circumstances can change however and so it is important to review the agreement regularly and/or on the emergence of certain events such as the birth of a child.
If you require any advice or assistance in relation to pre-nuptial agreements, financial settlement or divorce then do not hesitate to get in touch with one of our experience team who will be pleased to assist you
In December 2018 our organisation and working practices were independently audited and we were awarded the Law Society’s legal practice quality mark known as Lexcel
Lexcel provides a flexible, supportive management framework to promote a quality management approach and client service in how to run a legal practice. The framework helps practices develop consistent operational efficiencies and client services, manage risk effectively, reduce costs and promote profitability. It is the most appropriate Standard for the legal profession as it was written by solicitors for solicitors.
Lexcel sets the required standard in seven different areas:
Lexcel scheme rules outline the design, principles and governance processes of the scheme.
Lexcel is independently assessed and demonstrates our commitment to consistently deliver services that meet client expectations, improve overall satisfaction and assist regulatory compliance. Lexcel Accreditation is re-assessed every year.
We were already accredited through the Legal Aid Agency’s Specialist Quality Mark (SQM). There is some overlap between Lexcel and SQM, but in our view, SQM is more a minimum standard, whereas Lexcel is broader and is a better framework for ongoing practice improvement.
We submitted our application for Lexcel accreditation in October 2018 and were successfully audited at the start of December 2018.
Our audit report included the following from our assessor:
Gaining the Lexcel standard is important for us because it shows that we have financial, management and client care systems in place which are comparable to much bigger and longer established competitors.
Gaining Lexcel is a big step forward for the practice as it demonstrates that we are now a fully established and quality practice and will assist us to improve the reach of our services.
As an exercise, all of our team were involved in the preparation for audit and most were interviewed. We all have a stake in the successful outcome.
We are proud to display the Lexcel logo on our website as a demonstration of the quality of our practice.
On the 11 and 12 October 2018 travelled to Nottingham to attend Resolution’s annual Dispute Resolution Conference. The aim of the conference is to bring to together family law experts in dispute resolution to share their experiences and to discuss and learn about the latest ideas for innovation and promoting best practice.
The Resolution Dispute Resolution Conference is organised by Resolution’s Dispute Resolution Committee, of which I am a member. (Although I hasten to add that I was not on the conference organising subcommittee).
There were around 160 – 180 delegates from all around the country. It is always enjoyable to catch up with friends and colleagues and to meet other like-minded professionals. The majority of the delegates are either mediators, collaborative family lawyers or family arbitrators or like myself all 3 (as well as being practising specialist family law solicitors and barristers).
Amongst the topics discussed were promoting collaborative family law as the normal way of family law practice.
Sadly we are not quite there yet, with collaborative family law being the normal way of family law practice with some lawyers practising within family law still taking a litigious approach which can exacerbate family difficulties – and which is avoidant of the use of family mediation, collaborative family law and arbitration
Other topics included; Innovation in family law/mediation/collaborative law/arbitration; better preparing clients for stressful meetings including by encouraging clients to make use of techniques such as mindfulness and by accessing counselling; working together with complimentary professionals (such as financial advisers and children experts) and integrating working together in different aspects of practice; better assisting families to implement children court orders achieved through court proceedings (often with high conflict) or mediation and assisting couples to better work together in order to avoid returning to court.
The Henry Brown Lecture (named after Henry Brown – Henry is a pioneer of the use of family mediation in the UK and who incidentally trained me as both a family mediator in 1996 and a civil/commercial mediator – Henry is now enjoying his retirement) was given by Amita Sehgal who is a couple psychoanalytic psychotherapist accredited by the British Psychoanalytic Council through the Tavistock Institute of Medical Psychology. This considered the impacts of dealing with stress and anger and steps that could be taken to minimise the negative impacts of these.
The highlight of the conference was undoubtedly the keynote address given by Jo Berry and Patrick Magee of Building Bridges for Peace.
Jo Berry is the daughter of Sir Anthony Berry MP who was amongst those killed in the bombing of the Grand Hotel, Brighton by the IRA (Irish Republican Army) on October 12, 1984. Patrick Magee is the man who planted the bomb and who was convicted and sent to prison for that act.
Jo described how within 2 days of her father being killed she resolved to find something positive out of what had happened and to bring meaning to and even understand those who had killed her father.
Jo and Patrick met 16 years later after Patrick was released from prison as part of the Northern Ireland peace process. The charity Building Bridges for Peace was launched in Brighton in October 2009 on the 25th anniversary of the bombing.
Building Bridges for Peace works to enable divided communities and the general public to explore and better understand the roots of war, terrorism and violence. Jo and Patrick promote dialogue and mediation as the means to peace.
Jo Berry and Pat Magee have given talks in Palestine, Lebanon, Rwanda and throughout the UK. There is a quote on the Building Bridges for Peace website http://www.buildingbridgesforpeace.org/ from Terry Waite CBE which is worth repeating;
To be a subject of a grievous wrong is always wounding and painful and can frequently provoke anger.
However, anger, if allowed to fester is like a cancer of the soul. It does more harm to those who hold it than against those whom it is held.
Jo Berry knows from personal experience what it is to have to face deep suffering as her father was blown up in a IRA bomb. She has let go of personal need for revenge and empathised with Patrick Magee, the man responsible for planting the bomb.
To hear her speak alongside the one who killed her father is a living demonstration of the transforming power of reconciliation when two people who have been on different sides truly listen and can see each other’s humanity, an example this sad world so desperately need. Terry Waite CBE – humanitarian and former hostage
It was particularly inspiring to hear Jo and Patrick speak on a day that was in fact the 34th anniversary of the bombing.
Terry Waite’s words encapsulate the importance of the work of Jo and Patrick not only in the theatre of political conflict but also in the theatre of personal conflict.
As family law practitioners we are very often assisting clients who have been wronged and who are angry with their former partner who they feel has caused them that wrong.
The anger and pain is very often a two-way thing. Unresolved anger can play out in making it much harder to reach objectively reasonable outcomes and can be compounded by further anger generated through the process of divorce/separation and having orders/outcomes imposed. A couple’s children can be caught within this conflict and this can be very damaging indeed. This can play out in children being psychologically harmed, losing contact with one parent or family members (sometimes with parental alienation) or not receiving good role modelling to equip them to deal with resolving disputes in their own lives in the best way.
I would strongly recommend that if you ever have the opportunity to listen to Jo and Patrick speak then you should take this up. What they have achieved together, both on a personal level as well as through their wider work is truly inspiring.
The delegates to whom I spoke, all left thinking about how they could better assist their clients through their own personal conflicts.
I left the conference re-energised that as a practice we are clearly on the right track in terms of how we are trying to assist our clients and over the next few months we will be reflecting further upon how we can make improvements to our service and to supporting our team to do this.
I am already looking forward to the 2019 Resolution Dispute Resolution Conference.
I am a Solicitor who has specialised in Child Law since qualification in 1992. I was admitted to the Law Society Children Panel in 1996. My practice has one of the most experienced teams of child law specialist solicitors in the South West.
Over the years I have represented many parents and grandparents in Court Proceedings brought by Social Services. The Court now expects most cases to be finished in 26 weeks or less. This means that the window of time for parents and grandparents to make the right choices so that they will succeed is very small. Good decisions need to be made at the very start of a case.
No Solicitor who represents parents and grandparents in Social Services cases can claim that they have succeeded in keeping children with their parents/grandparents in every case. Sometimes the problems are simply too great to overcome in the timescale of the court process. Sometimes clients are unable to follow our advice or panic and switch off.
We always try hard to make sure that our clients give themselves the best chance of achieving the best realistic outcome and that their case is clearly heard by the Court. Over the years we have helped clients to achieve some excellent outcomes.
Being taken to Court always involves the risk of a bad outcome. This is because decisions are made by someone else. The best way to succeed is always to avoid ending up in Court in the first place.
There is no substitute to seeking specific advice from an experienced Solicitor. The following is a good place to start:
(more…)
On Friday 11 May 2018 I was privileged to Chair the 4th Devon Resolution Conference.
This was attended by 120 family law solicitors and mediators, not only from Devon, but also from Somerset and Cornwall.
The aim of the conference is to provide the highest quality training. Just as important is the need for family law practitioners to be able to meet in a relaxed and sociable environment to foster good communications and relations. We achieve the best for our clients when we work well together in a sensible professional way, fostered by best practice.
I have to own up to the fact that the conference was my idea. As Chair of Devon Resolution, I am also the conference Chair. But the conference would not have been the success that it is without the hard work of the Devon Resolution Committee (drawn from a broad range of Devon family lawyers and mediators) and the generosity of or speakers and also the support of our delegates
The consensus seems to be that 2018 was our best conference yet.
Stephen Wildblood is the Designated Family Judge for Bristol. He is also an old friend of ours having previously sat as a Family Judge in Devon and before that regularly appearing in our courts as a barrister.
Stephen’s speech reminded us of the importance of ensuring family court users were treated with fairness and dignity.
Stephen brought with him the Behind Closed Doors Theatre from Bristol. The group gave an amazing and highly thought provoking performance. Their work encourages us to think about how court users can find the experience incomprehensible and distressing, and reminds us of the lack of support to the vulnerable, particularly when care proceedings conclude. We hope to have them back another year.
Angela Lake-Carroll (Independent consultant in family law and Resolution’s Head of Standards) gave an update from National Resolution.
Angela also gave a thought provoking presentation – Changing Times – Family law and justice briefing – the message being to encourage family lawyers to improve their soft skills and use of dispute resolution. Angela also ran an excellent workshop for family mediators the previous day.
On the subject of communication, James Knight -iMA Strategies Alison Bull Mills and Reeve opened the conference and then ran a workshop looking at how improved understanding of our communication styles can help practitioners better meet the needs of their clients and also to work together.
I had previously attended their workshop; Spontaneous, controlling, cautious or precise? – Communication strategies to achieve better outcomes at the national Resolution Dispute Resolution Conference last November.
As a firm we have adopted the iMA communication questionnaire which is now embedded on our website.
Our other excellent speakers and workshop providers were; Sue Campbell QC of Magdalen Chambers who spoke on; How to deal with the evidence of children and vulnerable witnesses.
Anthony Kirk QC of 1KBW –Placement Orders – Setting Aside and the Relationship with Care Proceedings./What do you expect from your judge?
Markanza Cudby also of 1KBW – Appeals
Claire Wills-Goldingham QC of Colleton Chambers – The mentally disordered parent in the context of private law proceedings
Lucy Reed of St Johns Chambers –The Transparency Project. (more…)
We have had a busy start to 2018.
Here are some of our latest testimonials:
Thank you for your email and thank you for all your help in bringing about a return to a fairer childcare arrangement. We have just spent a lovely weekend in xxxxxxxxx with the girls and it was such a relief not having to have the usual stressful negotiations regarding travel arrangements and the worry that everything would be cancelled last minute.(Ian)
Thank you very much for your help and advice (always constructive and realistic) including when dealing with other professionals whose conduct did not match yours. (Ian)
Just a little note to say a huge thank you for your help and support on our case. (Kim)
Thank you for your advice and help. (Sandy)
Family Law clients are invariably dealing with difficult and stressful events in their lives. Sometimes when you are in a difficult situation you “cannot see the wood for the trees”. In other words clients can get locked in the problem and find it difficult to take a step back and put the problem in perspective and identify what really needs to happen for it to be resolved. This is where sensible advice is fundamental.
It is easy to mirror the problem back to a client (tell them what they want to hear). Good advice requires telling clients what needs to happen to achieve a positive outcome. Sometimes this means telling clients that they need to do something different (and it is not just the other party that needs to change). Good advice can be unpalatable. A good professional will not shy away from this.
Our philosophy is to focus on solutions and what needs to happen to achieve these.
It is always nice to receive thanks from clients for a job well done.
Our philosophy is also for constant improvement and we always welcome constructive comment which helps us to see where our service can be improved. One of the focuses of our Practice Manager – Leanne Cornock-Stark is to look at client experience and to implement improvements when we identify something that can be done better.
We know that Christmas is not a happy time that everyone. Indeed it can be very lonely and depressing. Some parents are for various reasons unable to spend time with their children on the main days of the Christmas holiday or even at all.
In the run-up to Christmas we deal with a surge in cases where separated parents are in dispute over the arrangements through which children will spend time with each parent over the Christmas holiday. Here are some hopefully helpful thoughts.
Children don’t want to see the adults around them arguing. Children want to enjoy everything that is going on. They will quite naturally want to see all of the important adults in their lives if possible. If they are taking part in a school play or similar performance children will normally want this to be watched by their important family members. Most importantly of all (again) children do not want to witness arguments; children wants to have fun and be happy.
If it has not been possible to agree arrangements for children to spend time with the adults who they do not live with during the year, then it is unlikely that there are going to be any significant changes agreed for the Christmas period. Equally, if the amount of time that the non-resident parent spends with their child is quite limited, then it is unlikely that it is going to be agreed that they can have loads ofadditional time over the Christmas holiday. Anyadditional time that can be agreed is likely to be along the lines of what is already taking place. Asking for more than is realistic will probably be counter-productive and will only lead to arguments.
If separated parents cannot get on with each other normally, then it is unrealistic to expect significant change over Christmas. Moving between one parent and another can be very stressful for children as well as for their parents. Sometimes the situation can be improved if a family member or friend can on a regular or even specific occasionassist with the move between one parent and the other.
The best time to discuss the arrangements for Christmas is in the spring of the year before. This allows ample time to undertake mediation. If agreements cannot be reached then an application would need to be made to the Court. Securing court time is not always easy and if there is a dispute over the Christmas arrangements, if an application is made to the court in the middle of December it is unlikely that the case will be able to get before a Judge in such a way that decisions can properly be made. The later a court application is left before Christmas, the less likely it is that a satisfactory outcome will be achieved
Courts make decisions based upon evidence. If an agreement has been reached between parents and it can be proven that an agreement existed then the starting point of the Court is likely to be based upon making the parents keep to their agreements (unless there is a good reason for change)rather than starting completely from scratch
Some parents sadly do not see their children or have their time with their children restricted because there are issues about safety. Examples of this can be where there has been domestic abuse or even abusive or unsafe behaviour involving the children. Sometimes the parent with whom the child lives places the question of safety to one side in order to try to be nice to the other for Christmas or because they want to give their children what they think their children want. Risks are unlikely to diminish simply because it is Christmas and if a parent places themselves or their children in an unsafe situation then they could be unfortunate consequences both with some problem arising and also with the possibility that social services could become involved with the family because of concerns over a parents failure to protect.
The best arrangements for children are ones where their parents are able to communicate well with each other and where both parents have confidence that the other will deliver their side of the agreement. The best arrangements are where parents are able to trust each other. Unless there is a significant safety issue the best way to achieve the best arrangements is through the parents talking to each other and finding a way to put past difficulties behind them. Mediation can be an excellent forum for achieving this. The starting point to a successful mediation is both parents accepting that there is a problem that needs to be resolved and both wishing to do something to resolve the problem.
Where advice is required it is always a good idea to do this as soon as it becomes clear that the problem will not easily be solved. In our experience problems do not easily go away if nothing is done to try and solve them. Reasonable arrangements for children over the Christmas period often include Christmas Day being shared or children spending Christmas with one family one year and with another the next. However, all situations are different. Getting specific legal advice is usually a good idea.
We are a Firm of Solicitors specialising in family law and a mediation service that is based in Honiton in East Devon. We also have branch offices in Taunton. Our mediation service is contracted with the legal aid agency to offer legally aided mediation in Honiton Exeter and Taunton. If you qualify for legal aid for mediation then the mediation will be free of charge.We are members of the family solicitors organisation Resolution. Ian Walker is currently the elected chair of the Devon region Of Resolution
The Ministry of Justice’s statistics bulletin for legal aid between January to March, published on 30 June 2017, shows that the number of Mediation Information and Assessment Meeting has fallen fell sharply since The Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012, (LASPO) which was introduced in April 2013.
Four years on, the number of Mediation Information and Assessment Meetings (MIAM) carried out under legal aid stands at around half of pre-LASPO levels.
Before LASPO, clients could not receive a legal aid certificate to cover the cost of their representation at court unless they had first considered mediation, subject to certain exceptions.
LASPO saw significant changes to the scope of family legal aid – with it being withdrawn from many family cases (unless there was independent evidence of domestic abuse or risk to a child from the other party)
The Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012, which was introduced in April 2013, made no changes to the scope of legal aid for facilitating mediation. Legal aid was also kept for facilitating mediation information and assessment meetings (MIAMs). At the time, the expectation was that the volume of mediation would increase.
Mediators with legal aid contracts have been saying for a long time that the volume of legally aided mediation has fallen and that far from encouraging families to mediate – the effect of LASPO has been to cause a significant reduction in the volume of legally aided mediation. (more…)
We all know that Court proceedings are very expensive and slow. Most clients are exhausted and deflated by the outcome.
The cost of a contested court process can easily be £15,000 – £20,000 per person. Dealing with a divorce and financial issues can easily take over a year. This is unaffordable or unacceptably costly for most families.
Traditional legal practice can also stoke mistrust and bad relations between separating couples. This can be very damaging for any children stuck in the middle.
But traditional Family Mediation cannot guarantee agreement. Clients can be lost without legal advice or their solicitors. Financial disclosure can be poor. If there is no agreement cost and time have been wasted.
Collaborative Law has not been the answer.
But we can now offer a process Med-Arb which is quicker and cheaper than Court – with legal advice integral.
Med-Arb: Integrating Advice/Representation with Mediation and Arbitration
I am one of only a handful of practitioners who are quadruple qualified as a Solicitor, Family Mediator, Civil Mediator and Arbitrator.
I have combined my knowledge of all four disciplines to create a model which provides a clear pathway to an early settlement.
The process is designed so that if the mediation fails, then the case is pretty much ready to proceed to Arbitration. This avoids significant delay.
In most cases that don’t settle the issues will have been sufficiently narrowed so a paper arbitration will be sufficient. But if not – then you are ready for a final -legally binding- Arbitration Hearing.
No need for FDA, FDR and Final Hearing over a further 6+month.
Everyone has clear roles and jobs. This means that the process can be offered to clients as a mostly fixed fee scheme (a final attended arbitration hearing is more difficult to predict and therefore price at the outset – but fixed fees can be agreed when the issues are clear.
Financial disclosure is best looked after by Solicitors.
The Mediator can best focus the clients into a problem solving mind-set. Everyone works together rather than against each other.
Fixed Fee divorce is only really possible when there is a very clear piece of work. This makes that possible.
We will be working with a panel of arbitrators who are all accredited members of IFLA and the CIArb (like myself). These are:
Karin Is a member of the Resolution National Committee and is Chair of Resolution’s Dispute Resolution Committee. She is also a Mediator and PPC (mediator supervisor).
The scheme allows freedom to instruct other arbitrators. Our panel members are all familiar with our scheme and all willing to work on the basis of fixed fees.
We are also pleased to say that some very experienced solicitors have agreed to represent clients in support of the scheme. Full details can be found in our brochure, together with the fee scheme.
More information can be found at our website.
To coincide with Resolution Good Divorce Week we are launching our own innovative Family Law Mediation-Arbitration (med-arb) Scheme.
Sorting out financial arrangements connected with divorce can be painfully slow and horrendously expensive. If the case proceeds through a court process costs can easily exceed £15,000 each and the whole process from walking into a solicitors office for the first time to obtaining a financial order can take over a year – sometimes well over a year
Mediation can help couples to reach agreements much quicker and at less cost – but mediation does not guarantee that an agreement will be reached. If the mediation fails this adds to the cost and to the delay – which is why many families – particularly where there is a limited budget decide not to mediate.
I am one of a handful of practitioners who are quadruple qualified as a Solicitor, Family Mediator, Civil Mediator and Arbitrator. What I have done, is to work out a scheme – a process – which combines the security to clients of receiving legal advice and representation, the benefits of reaching an agreement through mediation together with the certainty of outcome that can be achieved with arbitration.
Most clients are familiar with what a solicitor does (advise and represent) and what a mediator does (assist the couple on a neutral basis to negotiate – and hopefully also to improve their working relationship).
Arbitration is a different form of resolving disputes. It is relatively new in the context of family breakdown. Essentially the arbitrator is a private judge who will make a legally binding decision.
In our Family Law Mediation-Arbitration Scheme we have worked at a process where the solicitors gather together financial disclosure and advise their clients on the parameters and fairness of what a settlement could be. This is what solicitors are really good at. Obtaining a clear financial picture can be more challenging for a mediator.
The solicitors and the mediator and the couple work towards a one off mediation meeting where all will attend – armed with all the information that they need with a view to reaching an agreement. We have called this the Case Resolution Mediation Meeting. Most cases will settle at this stage.
The mediator will work with the couple at the outset to deal with any interim issues and then before the Case Resolution Mediation Meeting to help the couple be properly prepared for that meeting – in order to maximise the prospects of settlement.The mediator will use their skills at the Case Resolution Mediation Meeting to maximise the prospects of settlement. If all goes well a final financial consent order will be drafted on the day.
If the case does not settle at the Case Resolution Mediation Meeting our Family Law Mediation-Arbitration Scheme allows the case to move seamlessly into an arbitration process.
In most cases, even if there is not an agreement at the Case Resolution Mediation Meeting, the gap between the couple should be sufficiently narrow that the arbitrator will be able to make a decision simply by looking at the paperwork.
If a paper arbitration is not possible then there will be an arbitration hearing.
Even in the worst-case scenario, the whole process should be able to be completed in less than six months. The biggest potential delay would be obtaining pension information/advice.
Apart from the scenario where there is an attended Arbitration Hearing – the eventualities are sufficiently predictable that these can be charged on a fixed fee basis. Full details of the fixed fees are in the scheme documentation. However, in all scenarios the costs should be significantly less then a contested court process.
The process gets underway after the couple and their solicitors sign the mediation contract and the binding agreement to arbitrate. This means that if the mediation part fails everyone is committed to proceed to arbitration. Our Family Law Mediation-Arbitration Scheme does however include a single break clause which deals with a scenario where one of the couple fails to provide full financial disclosure. This break is there as a safeguard – but it is unlikely to be needed – because exercising the break calls will commit the couple to spending thousands of pounds in a court process.
In order for this to all work we need to have a team of expert arbitrators and solicitors who are committed to working within the process and who are willing to work to the fee scheme.
I am pleased to say that we are very lucky with our panel of participating arbitrators. These are:
Karin Walker|Partner KGW Family Law, Woking
Ian Taylor |Partner Coodes, St Austell. Deputy District Judge
Rhys Taylor |Barrister, 36 Bedford Row Chambers, London.
Barbara Corbett | Partner, Benest Corbett Renouf, Jersey.
Karin Walker is a member of the National Committee of Resolution and she is also the Chair of the Resolution Dispute Resolution Committee.All of our participating arbitrators and our initial panels of solicitors have considered the terms of the Family Law Mediation-Arbitration Scheme very carefully and are all very happy to be involved in it. The mediation side of the scheme has also been independently assessed by my own mediation PPC (practice supervisor).
I am in the role of mediator.I have been a family mediator since 1996.
I am also a practising solicitor and an arbitrator and mediator for civil disputes (where the style of mediation is slightly different).
Our scheme is inclusive and not exclusive. We would be very happy for other solicitors to participate and we will also be happy for the solicitors to pick arbitrators not on our panel.
To be included on the list – solicitors need to commit to the fixed fees and to working within the spirit of the scheme.
I could not speak to everyone that I know in the legal world when I was working this out. I therefore limited those who I discussed it with to some near neighbours.
If anyone would like to be added to the list, they will be very welcome.
I will be offering the scheme in its attached form in East Devon (from Honiton), Exeter, Taunton and Newton Abbot. I am happy to run a modified version of the scheme elsewhere.
If you are slightly further afield and you would like to be able to participate in the scheme then please do let me know and we can work out how we can make modifications to benefit your clients.
