Increases in the number private family law cases in the courts has led to calls from family law professionals for the judiciary to more proactively point families in the direction of non-court dispute resolution (NCDR) options
The latest quarterly family court statistics show an 11% increase in the number of private family law cases in April to June 2026 compared to the equivalent quarter in 2025, with a further 2% increase (10,685) in disposed private law cases during April to June 2026, compared to the equivalent quarter the year prior. There were 28,842 new private law orders applied for in April to June 2026, up 9% on the equivalent quarter in 2025, with 23,100 individual children involved in these applications. The number of private law orders made in April to June 2026 was 27,855, down 1% on the equivalent quarter in 2025.
One issue identified is a spike in the number of Specific Issue Orders, asking the courts to decide single points that parents cannot agree on. There is “much speculation” of the causes behind the increase said Sebastian Burrows, partner in the family team at Birketts LLP but “what is very telling is that 33% of the court applications do not result in a court order, meaning that they are withdrawn and/or agreed between the parents.” he said. “This is likely to mean that parents, guided by the courts, are actually able to resolve their disputes or are pushed to resolve them by using other means, such as mediation.”
“Does this suggest the real need for greater engagement in mediation/alternative dispute resolution (ADR), or more willingness by the courts to insist on parents using ADR? Both, without doubt.”
In April to June 2026, it took on average 33 weeks for private law cases to be disposed, down 3 weeks from the same period in 2025. 52% of all private law cases were dealt with within 26 weeks of application in April to June 2026, up 3 percentage points on the same period in the previous year.
Anne McAllister, partner and head of family at Morr & Co, said: “In matters relating to arrangements for children, the role of the family court is not to take over parental responsibility, and they will only make decisions where parents and carers are unable to do so. Court may be necessary where there are safeguarding concerns or one parent will not engage, but it is rarely the quickest, cheapest or least stressful route. For most families, the best outcome for the children is an agreement shaped by both parents – one that reflects their priorities and the realities of their everyday family life – rather than an order imposed by the court.
She added family courts have “taken a more proactive approach” to NCDR but acknowledged the route continued to be appropriate where there are serious welfare concerns, domestic abuse, urgency, risk of abduction, or a complete refusal by one parent to engage.
“Many practical issues, such as handovers, special occasions or day-to-day communication, can often be resolved more constructively outside court. That does not make those issues unimportant; it simply means they may be better suited to discussion, negotiation or mediation before court is considered. There are a number of Non-Court Dispute Resolution options available to parents. The right route will depend on the nature of the disagreement, the level of trust between the parents and whether there are any safety concerns. In short, court is there when it is needed, but there is clear guidance that parents must give proper consideration to Non-Court Dispute Resolution options first.”
