The concept of one lawyer representing two clients is not a new one but is currently in the spotlight thanks to Resolution. They have been campaigning for their model, Resolution Together, which is now widely recognised, for some years and is now part of our day-to-day practice.
At first I will admit that I had reservations and many questions. How this would work in practice, how can one lawyer provide jointly beneficial advice, what happens when there is a conflict, and not to mention the in-house regulations, and how this all fits within the SRA and CILEx regulations. i
But reservations and questions aside, this model felt as though it was a natural progression from the joint application for divorce introduced by the Divorce Dissolution and Separation Act 2020. Our clients were beginning to ask whether we offer this service and when we weren’t, there was confusion with the question being, ‘but we can divorce together, why can’t we resolve our finances together?’. Did they have a valid point? It appears so.
Resolution Together is a recognised method of Non-Court Dispute Resolution and so with this in mind, as well as the ability for couples to divorce together, I put my reservations to one side and embarked on the training. Some may say the rest is history.
Is it for every couple, no. But for the right couple, this can be an incredibly successful way of reaching an agreement. The parties need to be willing to be open and honest and they must be emotionally ready to begin negotiations. The lawyer undertaking the initial individual meetings and screening needs to use their training and skills as a family lawyer to identify whether the couple before them is the right couple to undertake this process. To explain to the couple wanting to embark on this route that perhaps this is not the correct one for them is not easy to communicate. Nonetheless, the lawyer must do so, as to unfairly encourage parties down this path would not be in their best interests should there be concerns over conflict, power imbalance, emotional challenges and of course the obvious non-disclosure issues and highly contentious cases which are plainly not suitable for this model. The parties may try to convince you otherwise and balancing our inner ‘people pleasing’ characteristics as family lawyers, commerciality and regulatory issues is not always easy.
It is not a cheap alternative, nor a process to cut corners, and we must be clear this is also not an unbundling service. If anything, I see it becoming a boutique tailored method of meeting a couple’s needs and reaching agreement. Perhaps this is why it is reported that Pep Guardiola and his soon to be ex-wife, Cristina Serra, have chosen this model. Or perhaps because one of the advantages of reaching an out of Court settlement in this way means that the details and outcome will be kept out of the press and public eye, given the confidentiality and settling out of Court by consent means no transparency orders.
Whilst there are qualities of this model that will clearly be attractive for the HNW/UHNW and celebs alike, and perhaps it does have a boutique feel to it, this model should be accessible to all. We must do more as family lawyers to advertise to families that this service is available as well as all forms of NCDR.
