header-logo header-logo

Mediation vouchers: a short-term patch

21 February 2025 / Stuart Hanson
Issue: 8105 / Categories: Opinion , Family , Mediation , ADR , Divorce , Legal aid focus
printer mail-detail
208722
Stuart Hanson on why mediators should not be celebrating the repeated extension of an inadequate scheme

The recent announcement that the Ministry of Justice (MoJ) has extended the Family Mediation Voucher Scheme by another 12 months has been met with praise from some quarters, including the Family Mediation Council (FMC). The FMC has highlighted that ‘early analysis from the first 7,200 families to use the scheme showed more than two-thirds reached agreement without the need to go to court’—on the surface, this sounds like a success story worth celebrating.

However, beneath the headlines lies a set of deeper concerns that the mediation profession—and the public—should not ignore. While the voucher scheme has undoubtedly encouraged some separating couples to explore mediation, it also masks the ongoing underfunding of family mediation and the wider issues surrounding access to justice in private family law cases.

Since the removal of legal aid for most private family law disputes in 2013, family mediation was promoted as the government’s flagship alternative to court

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Pillsbury—Steven James

Pillsbury—Steven James

Firm boosts London IP capability with high-profile technology sector hire

Clarke Willmott—Michelle Seddon

Clarke Willmott—Michelle Seddon

Private client specialist joins as partner in Taunton office

DWF—Rory White-Andrews

DWF—Rory White-Andrews

Finance and restructuring offering strengthened by partner hire in London

NEWS
Mazur v Charles Russell Speechlys LLP [2025] EWHC 2341 (KB) continues to stir controversy across civil litigation, according to NLJ columnist Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School—AKA ‘The insider’
SRA v Goodwin is a rare disciplinary decision where a solicitor found to have acted dishonestly avoided being struck off, says Clare Hughes-Williams of DAC Beachcroft in this week's NLJ. The Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT) imposed a 12-month suspension instead, citing medical evidence and the absence of harm to clients
In their latest Family Law Brief for NLJ, Ellie Hampson-Jones and Carla Ditz of Stewarts review three key family law rulings, including the latest instalment in the long-running saga of Potanin v Potanina
The Asian International Arbitration Centre’s sweeping reforms through its AIAC Suite of Rules 2026, unveiled at Asia ADR Week, are under examination in this week's NLJ by John (Ching Jack) Choi of Gresham Legal
In this week's issue of NLJ, Yasseen Gailani and Alexander Martin of Quinn Emanuel report on the High Court’s decision in Skatteforvaltningen (SKAT) v Solo Capital Partners LLP & Ors [2025], where Denmark’s tax authority failed to recover £1.4bn in disputed dividend tax refunds
back-to-top-scroll