Redpath & FellBARRISTERS & SOLICITORS
← All practice areas

Mediation & Collaborative Practice

Resolving it without a courtroom, and without a war.

Court is a poor instrument for family disagreements. It is slow, expensive, public, and it hands the decision to someone who will meet your family for a total of about ninety minutes.

In mediation, a neutral third party helps the two of you reach an agreement; each of you still gets independent legal advice before signing. In the collaborative process, both parties and both lawyers sign an agreement not to litigate, which changes the incentives considerably.

Neither is right for everyone. Where there has been family violence, or where one party will not disclose, mediation can entrench a power imbalance rather than resolve it — and we will say so rather than take your retainer.

What this covers

  • Family mediation
  • Collaborative family law
  • Mediation-arbitration
  • Four-way settlement meetings
  • Parenting coordination
  • Independent legal advice on a mediated agreement
  • Drafting the resulting separation agreement
  • Screening for suitability

Questions we get asked

What's the difference between mediation and collaborative law?
In mediation one neutral person helps you both reach agreement, and you each get advice separately. In the collaborative process you each have your own lawyer in the room, and all four of you sign a contract agreeing not to go to court — if it fails, both lawyers must withdraw.
Is a mediated agreement binding?
The mediator's report itself is not. It becomes binding when it is turned into a separation agreement, signed with independent legal advice on both sides. We draft that final agreement as a separate step.
What if we get most of the way and stall?
That is a good outcome, not a failure. Narrowing six issues to one and litigating only that is dramatically cheaper than starting from scratch, and courts look favourably on parties who resolved what they could.

Related areas