Despite Part 3 and 28 of the Family Procedure Rules only taking effect a month ago, the Family Court is already delivering on its promise to ensure more people use alternative dispute resolution to resolve their matrimonial claims.

Since the introduction of the new powers on 29 April, the Court has the ability to adjourn court proceedings for the purposes of non-court dispute resolution without the consent of the divorcing parties.

In his judgment of NA v LA, Nicholas Allen KC emphasised that the Court has a duty to consider non-court dispute resolution at every stage and said that this was a paradigm case for the court to exercise its new powers. Despite there being concerns regarding disclosure, he adjourned the proceedings with immediate effect to allow time for the parties to explore non-court dispute resolution and directed the parties to later explain what attempts have been made before the court considers further case management directions. Nicholas Allen KC highlighted that his decision would be to the parties emotional and financial benefit as well as to the benefit of their children.

Nicholas Allen KC’s endorsement of Peel J’s earlier observation that there is no need for financial disclosure to be given by the parties before engaging in non-court dispute resolution is interesting. Although arbitration has the necessary “teeth” to deal with a reluctant discloser, other non-court resolution methods arguably do not. Careful considersation will therefore need to be given as to what method of non-court dispute resolution is most suitable for each individual case.