Alternatives to Court

A summary of our Alternatives to Court Services

Mediation: In mediation, a neutral third party (the mediator) helps the parties in a dispute communicate to negotiate a mutually acceptable resolution. It is a confidential process. The mediator cannot offer legal advice, and does not decide on or impose a solution, but instead facilitates the discussion and encourages the parties to find common ground.  

Pros: It is often seen as a less expensive, quicker and more collaborative approach to litigation. It offers the parties greater control over the outcome of their dispute. Rather than leaving the decision up to a judge, mediation puts the power of the outcome into the hands of those directly involved in the dispute. Mediation is less stressful and less formal than litigation, so there are fewer rules and regulations to adhere to. The resolution can take weeks rather than months or years, allowing the parties to move on with their lives more quickly. Mediation allows the parties to explore creative solutions that may not be available in a courtroom setting. By working together towards a common goal, parties may be able to come up with a solution that works for everyone involved. Parties are more likely to maintain a positive relationship after attending mediation. 

Cons: Mediation cannot always guarantee an outcome that is favourable to both parties (neither can the court process). In order for mediation to be successful parties have to be willing to compromise, and they may not wish to concede anything. It can be tricky if either party is withholding information. During the process either party can withdraw at any time. It can be difficult to enforce the terms of an agreement if one or both parties do not comply with the terms they have agreed to.  

Collaborative Law: In collaborative law, each party hires a collaboratively trained lawyer. With the parties, they will work to reach a resolution outside of court. The goal of collaborative law is to promote open communication, transparency, and cooperation between the parties, resulting in a resolution that is in the best interests of everyone involved. If there are divorce proceedings, the lawyers work together to draft a Consent Order or a written agreement confirming the terms agreed to finalise the case.  

Pros: Both parties and their respective lawyers sign up at the start to work on a collaborative process. This means they agree to work to a solution. You receive legal advice throughout the whole process. You meet face to face rather than negotiating via letter or phone. The process is built around your individual timescale and priorities rather than a timetable being imposed by a court.   

Cons: Both parties must agree to the process. If an agreement cannot be reached, you will need to start over. Additionally, you will need to change your lawyer if you proceed to court. This process may not be suitable for high-conflict parties and is not necessarily a less expensive method to court proceedings. 

Arbitration: In arbitration, the parties agree to have a neutral third party (the arbitrator) make a binding decision on the dispute. The arbitrator hears evidence and opinions from both sides, and then makes a decision. The parties agree to be bound by the arbitrator’s decision, which is usually final and can be enforced by a court.  

Pros: It is efficient and flexible. It is easier to schedule. There can be simplified rules of evidence and procedure and therefore it can be less complicated than the court process. You can choose the judge, ensuring both sides have confidence in their impartiality and fairness. There are limited opportunities for appeal, providing finality and bringing an end to the dispute. 

Cons: Arbitrators may consider evidence that might be excluded under court rules. The parties give up their right to appeal, and there is no opportunity to challenge witness evidence.   

Resolution Together: Resolution Together is a new, revolutionary service offered by Walker Family Law. Hiring a single lawyer, together, enables a couple to develop a way to resolve their issues, with both parties receiving advice at the same time with a qualified and experienced lawyer facilitating discussions and negotiations. This supports a mutually amicable and fair method to finding a solution that works for everyone. The Divorce, Dissolution and Separation Act 2020 allows couples to make joint applications to end a marriage. The aim is to try and minimise conflict and animosity between a separating couple. 

Pros: Focuses on the best interests of the family rather than one party “winning”. With less conflict involved, it is therefore less mentally and psychologically straining.    

Cons: It is not suitable for every dispute. It is unlikely to achieve a positive outcome in cases with unresolved allegations of domestic abuse, safeguarding concerns for children, or generally high levels of emotion, conflict or an imbalance of power between the parties.