ReSolution Issue 9 May 2016 | Page 17

Summary Written by: Anet Kate, Mediator & FDR Provider


3 Another significant number of cases (14% of “not settled” cases) not resolved 6-8 months after filing were undefended and would likely have received exemptions.

Of the two cases that went to mediation, one case had settled, but a party had then moved before signing the agreed terms of settlement, and could not be found. Later (after filing proceedings in court) that party was found, and the matter resolved by consent without further intervention. This case was regarded as settled following mediation.

The second case did not resolve at mediation. In that case, there had not been complete disclosure, or agreement about the value of key assets. Accordingly, attendance at mediation might have been premature.

The adequacy of disclosure comes forward as a key input into the success or otherwise of any attempt at settlement. In less than a quarter of the cases, the parties reported that satisfactory disclosure had occurred; in slightly less than half of the case the parties had agreed about the pool of property for division; and in only 15% of cases the parties agree on the value of their assets.

Probably as a consequence of the above, in nearly two thirds of the cases the parties could not